Appendix P – Socioeconomics
The socioeconomic analysis and this appendix were prepared for the BLM by a team of specialists at
Environmental Resources Management (ERM) and subcontractors, under the project management of
Clive Graham, ERM, and the direction of Stewart Allen of the interdisciplinary team.
Issue 1
How would the alternatives affect the supply, demand, and value of goods and services derived from
BLM-administered lands?
Western Oregon Timber Market Model
The BLM modeled timber markets34 in western Oregon using stumpage supply and demand functions that
incorporate existing information, linear functions, and the economic constructs of supply, derived
demand, and market arbitrage. In this analysis, the BLM described the stumpage market using linear
equations for demand (𝑄𝑑 ) and supply (𝑄𝑠 ):
𝑄𝑑 = 𝑎1 − 𝑎2 ∗ 𝑃
𝑄𝑠 = 𝑏1 + 𝑏2 ∗ 𝑃
(1)
(2)
The parameters 𝑎1 , 𝑎2 , 𝑏1 , 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑏2 can be estimated from the observed market price, quantity, estimates of
the stumpage supply, and demand elasticities. Key is the relation for estimating elasticity (∈) as:
∆𝑄
𝑝
∈ = ∆𝑃 × 𝑞
(3)
Equation 3 can be rewritten to solve for the slope of equations 1 and 2 (𝑎2 , 𝑏2 ) as:
𝑞
𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒 = ∈ × 𝑝
(4)
The intercept terms of equations 1 and 2 (𝑎1 , 𝑏1 ) can be solved as:
𝑞
𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡 = 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒 ×𝑝
(5)
The development of the supply and demand relations each involve additional steps described in the
following paragraphs. Once the equations are parameterized, they can be solved as simultaneous
equations for market equilibrium (where qs = qd and ps = pd). In this analysis, the BLM assumed that
market arbitrage following changes in BLM timber harvest would lead to new market equilibrium prices
and private harvest levels.
Stumpage Supply
The supply curve is constructed as a composite of the behavior of different groups of timberland owners.
In this case, it represents the timber harvest behavior of five different timberland owners/agencies: private
34
Timber markets are regional in nature defined by available species and mix of manufacturing facilities.
Traditionally, western Oregon is considered part of the larger Douglas-fir region, or the Pacific Northwest,
Westside. For a more detailed discussion, see Haynes (2008).
1505 | P a g e
entities, State agencies, the U.S. Forest Service, the BLM, and other public entities. Of these five owner
groups, only the private timberland owners are known to be responsive to different price levels. The BLM
assumed in this analysis that the four public owner groups set harvest levels through various planning
processes that are generally unresponsive to price levels. In the context of equation 2, this means that the
slope coefficient is based solely on the elasticity of private timberland owners. Public owners contribute
only to the intercept term; the q in equation 5 includes both public and private timber harvest.
Stumpage Demand
In the case of saw timber, the largest product markets are for solid wood products like lumber and panel
products.35 In this case, the BLM derived stumpage demand function from product demand. In
agricultural literature,36 factor and product markets are linked through a concept called the “elasticity of
price transmission” (𝜕), defined as
𝜕 =
∆𝑃𝑝
∆𝑃𝑠
𝑃𝑠
× 𝑃𝑝
(6)
where 𝑃𝑝 is product price, and 𝑃 𝑠 is the stumpage price. The elasticity of price transmission is calculated
in two steps. First, a marketing margin can be estimated as:
𝑃 𝑠 = 𝑐1 + 𝑐2 × 𝑃𝑝
(7)
Second, using the results from equation 7, ∂ is calculated as:
1
𝜕 =𝑐 ×
2
𝑃𝑠
𝑃𝑝
(8)
The elasticity of price transmission is necessary to estimate the elasticity of demand for stumpage,
consistent with product markets as shown in equation 9.
∈𝑠 = ∈𝑝 × 𝜕
(9)
With ∈𝑠 , equation 4 can estimate the slope of the stumpage demand function, and equation 5 can estimate
the slope coefficient.
Parameterizing the Model
In this analysis, the BLM estimated the model using data for 2012 (Table P-1). Price data (Dollars/Mbf)
and harvest volume data (MMbf) are in long log scale and were collected from the 2012 Production,
Prices, Employment and Trade report (Zhou 2013).
35
36
See the discussion in Adams and Haynes (1980). Also, see Adams and Haynes (2007).
See George and King (1971) for a summary of derived demand as it is used here.
1506 | P a g e
Table P-1. Price data and harvest volume data, 2012
Harvest Volume
Price
Ownership
(MMbf)
(Dollars/Mbf)
Private
2,664.2
State
234.4
$301.55
U.S. Forest Service
268.1
$94.65
BLM
144.3
$146.41
Other Public
43.2
Total/Average
3,354.2
$180.87
Weights
Weighted Price
0.362
0.414
0.223
1.000
$109.28
$39.23
$28.74
177.26
In this analysis, the BLM estimated ∂ as 0.83837 and, from the literature, used values for ∈ of 0.277 for
private timber supply and 0.68538 for softwood lumber and panels. Using this information, the BLM
developed the following supply and demand functions:
qs = 2,615.84 + 4.1655 P
qd = 5,279.59 – 10.8619 P
The solution of these two equations is the equilibrium price and quantity observed in 2012.
37
The BLM estimated this by estimating the market margin (Equation 7) using lumber price data (Table P-1) and
BLM stumpage price (Table 96) from Zhou (2013), 1986–2011. The elasticity of price transmission was computed
using equation 8.
38
Both elasticity estimates are weighted averages taken from Table 3.4 and 3.3 in Adams and Haynes (2007).
1507 | P a g e
Outdoor Recreation Demand Elasticity Calculation
Purpose and Background
This section describes the approach to calculating demand elasticity, or responsiveness, to changes in the
quantity of BLM-administered outdoor recreation areas. Its purpose is to calculate demand elasticity to
estimate how outdoor recreation participation would change under the Proposed RMP and each
alternative. The results of this analysis provide district-specific estimates for changes in visitation by
alternative, which can then be used to estimate the economic value and market impacts associated with
visits. ECONorthwest, as a subcontractor to ERM, prepared this analysis for the BLM.
Because there does not exist a traditional market establishing prices and supply for most outdoor
recreation, economists typically base their value estimates on visitation and time-use information (see, for
example, Hoteling 1947, McConnell and Strand 1981, Amoako-Tuffour and Martínez-Espiñeira 2012).
These methods of valuation often work well when coupled with site visitation and individual socioeconomic data but are often insufficient when considering locations that are not currently managed for
recreational purposes. A central issue with valuing recreation due to proposed site changes is to
understand the interplay of recreation demand and land supply. For instance, Siikamäki (2011) utilized
the American Time Use Survey (ATUS) data to value the effect of increases in the supply of State park
lands on recreational time use. Results of his model suggest that the addition of approximately 2 million
acres of State park lands between 1975 and 2007 contributed to about 600 million hours of nature
recreation and $3.85 billion in annual recreational value.
ECONorthwest has developed a model of the effect of recreational land supply on demand for outdoor
recreational time use in the western continental United States. Importantly, this model distinguishes
between changes in the supply of protected land managed for recreational uses versus other nonrecreational land uses (e.g., forestry, biodiversity, and mineral extraction). The data used for this model
include recreational time use from the 2007–2013 ATUS, to characterize utilization of recreational
resources, and the U.S. Geological Survey Protected Area Database, to define the local supply of
recreation. Based upon these sources of data, the model predicts the effect of changes in the supply of
recreational lands on time spent recreating.
Data
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics funds ATUS, and the U.S. Census Bureau collects the data. ATUS
provides detailed descriptions of daily time use for survey respondents. ATUS provides a representative
snapshot of the annual national time budget for Americans 15 years of age or older during a particular
year. ATUS respondents are drawn from a sub-sample of individuals exiting the Current Population
Survey, used to estimate national employment statistics. Time use categories include activities such as
eating, sleeping, working, and driving.39 In addition, these data provide estimates of the total time the
respondent spends engaging in outdoor recreation. The time use categories used to represent outdoor
recreation include:
 Biking
 Rock Climbing
 Hunting
 Fishing
 Golfing
 Hiking
 Running/Walking
 Snow Skiing
39
For a full list of ATUS time use designations see U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2013).
1508 | P a g e

Team Sports
The sum of the total minutes allocated to these activities is representative of the budget for outdoor
recreation for a particular ATUS survey respondent. These estimates are nationally representative using
sample weights provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. These weights take into account the day of the week
of the interview and the total share of the US population that that the individual represents.
The sample considered for this analysis consists of ATUS respondents from the years 2007–2013 located
in western U.S. states.40 Due to privacy concerns, ATUS does not provide detailed locational information
for survey respondents. However, linking this survey with data previously collected from the Current
Population Survey can be used to identify the state and core based statistical area (CBSA) the individual
is located in, which are the spatial units used for this analysis. Hence, this analysis excludes individuals
located outside of a CBSA, which as of 2010, represents approximately 6.3 percent of the U.S. population
(U.S. Census Bureau 2010). Overall, there are 33,069 respondents from 78 CBSAs located across the
western U.S. Approximately 6 percent of respondents were from the Oregon.
For this analysis, the BLM represented the total supply of government-managed recreational lands using
the Protected Area Database—a GIS-based database of land use in the United States, including Federal,
State, and local government land holdings. These data also distinguish between land management
designations and based upon this information, we determine the total quantity of recreational and nonrecreational lands managed by Federal and State/local agencies, respectively, for each CBSA in the
western United States. As examples, recreational lands would include National, State and local parks,
whereas, non-recreation lands include lands managed for timber production, mining, or habitat
management.
The dependent variable for this analysis is the total minutes spent per person per day engaging in outdoor
recreation, summarized in Table P-2. Explanatory variables include individual controls for gender, age,
number of children living at home, race, educational attainment, income, employment, as well as the
population of the CBSA and population of the State per year. The analysis also controlled for the day of
the week, the month, and if the interview day was on a holiday. Regional fixed effects are included to
account for fixed differences in recreational behavior among states.41 The supply of parkland is
represented as the density of parks, measured as the acres of parkland per acre. Alternative models were
also run using the total acres of parks and density of parks per acre per person, with no improvement over
results reported here. Table P-2 provides summary statistics for included explanatory variables.
40
This includes the following states Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New
Mexico, North Dakota, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Dakota Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
41
In this analysis, the BLM divides the Western states into three regions: 1) Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico,
Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Utah, and Texas 2) California and Nevada, 3) Idaho, Oregon, Montana, North
Dakota, South Dakota, Washington, and Wyoming.
1509 | P a g e
Table P-2. Summary statistics
Variable
Mean
Female
0.552
Age
44.834
Number of Children at Home
0.978
Race
Black
0.081
Hispanic
0.286
Asian
0.058
Other
0.029
Education
High School
0.208
Some College
0.286
Bachelors
0.206
Professional Degree
0.111
Income
$15k – $30k
0.156
$30k – $50k
0.195
$50k – $75k
0.175
$75k – $100k
0.118
$100k – $150k
0.111
Over $150k
0.099
Missing
0.065
Employment
Unemployed
0.043
Not in Labor Force
0.344
Population
CBSA Population (in 100s of Thousands)
36.915
State Population (in 100s of Thousands)
211.772
CBSA Park Density (Acres in Parks  Gross Acres)
Federal Recreation
7.855
Federal Non-recreation
17.369
State Recreation
2.046
State Non-recreation
5.424
Standard
Deviation
0.497
17.442
1.216
Minimum
Maximum
15
-
1
85
10
0.273
0.452
0.233
0.168
-
1
1
1
1
0.406
0.452
0.404
0.315
-
1
1
1
1
0.363
0.396
0.380
0.323
0.314
0.299
0.247
-
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.203
0.475
-
1
1
38.361
143.192
8.236
20.779
2.647
5.902
0.976
9.348
-
130.648
384.314
43.723
83.552
11.942
29.294
Econometric Model
Individuals in this analysis include both those who spend at least part of their day recreating outdoors (17
percent of observations) and others who spent no time on recreation during the interview day. Thus, to
account for censoring of the dependent variable, the econometric model is a Tobit model of the number of
minutes spent on outdoor recreation per day with left hand censoring at zero. In addition, the model is
weighted using provided ATUS survey weights for consistent and representative results for the average
American in the sample. Let Y be the daily minutes spent on outdoor recreation for individual i in CBSA
j, and equation 1 represents the econometric model for this analysis.
(1)
1510 | P a g e
Yij = β1 ∙ FRj + β2 ∙ FNRj + β3 ∙ LRj + β4 ∙ LNRj + XijA + Ri + Ɛij
Equation 1 predicts the total budget for outdoor recreation as a function of the supply of protected lands in
the vicinity of the individual, along with other individual attributes. The variables FRj, FNRj, LRj and
LNRj represent the density of protected lands managed for Federal recreation, Federal non-recreation,
local recreation, and local non-recreation at the CBSA level, respectively. Xij is a vector of other
individual and community attributes (e.g., income, education, race, population) and Α is a vector of
coefficients for these attributes. Ri is a vector of regional fixed effects and Ɛij is a normally distributed
error term, clustered by CBSA to account for correlation in recreational patterns among individuals
located in the same metropolitan area.
Importantly, for individuals with non-zero time allocated to recreation reported in the ATUS data, the
analysis cannot determine the precise location where recreation took place. Hence, while some of the
budgeted recreation time may occur on Federal and local recreation sites, some time may also be spent at
other locations or outside the local CBSA. However, the purpose of the model is to determine the general
effect of increases in supply of recreational on recreational demand, rather than a precise accounting of
locations and times where recreation occurred.
The coefficients β1 – β4 give the marginal effect of an increase in the density of parklands on the budget
of time spent on outdoor recreation. For the purpose of this analysis, the BLM assumed that an increase in
the supply of recreational lands, be they managed by Federal or local agencies, would have a positive
effect on time spent recreating. The effect of non-recreational lands is ambiguous. Because these lands
would not be managed explicitly for recreation, recreational opportunities may be limited in these areas.
By comparing the marginal effect of an increase in recreational lands and a parallel decrease in nonrecreational lands, it is possible to estimate the effect of a shift in lands management from nonrecreational to recreational uses.
Results
Table P-3 presents coefficients and standard errors for results of the Tobit model of daily recreational
time use for western states during the years 2007–2013. Where statistically significant, coefficients
reported in Table 2 generally conform to expectation. On average, males, retired individuals and those
with fewer children living at home tend to spend more time on outdoor recreation. Age has a non-linear
effect on recreation. For younger individuals, increases in age tend to decrease time spent recreating;
whereas, older individuals spend more time on recreation as they age. This result is consistent with the
hypothesis that respondents generally have less time to devote to recreation as they enter the work force
and raise a family but gradually have more time to spend on recreation as they retire and children leave
the house. In addition, respondents with greater income (above $50,000 a year) and a bachelors or postbachelor’s degree tend to spend more time recreating. Individuals located in more populated states also
tend to report more spending more time on outdoor recreation. This result may be due to more populated
states having larger budgets to spend on maintaining and establishing recreation areas, thus encouraging
recreation though higher quality opportunities.
1511 | P a g e
Table P-3. Tobit model of daily time spent on outdoor recreation for western U.S. states in the years
2007–2013, coefficients and standard errors
Variable
Coefficient
Standard Error
Female
-36.36***
3.11
Age
-4.44***
0.67
Age^2
0.04***
0.01
Number of Children at Home
-9.97***
3.08
Number of Children at Home ^2
-0.05
0.63
Race
Black
-7.23
8.17
Hispanic
-0.02
5.33
Asian
-0.89
6.63
Other
20.19*
10.70
Education
High School
-20.29***
5.53
Some College
-7.99
6.50
Bachelors
25.18***
6.76
Professional Degree
43.20***
7.49
Income
$15k – $30k
-2.01
8.06
$30k – $50k
9.27
7.31
$50k – $75k
18.97***
6.52
$75k – $100k
28.16***
8.08
$100k – $150k
44.80***
9.40
Over $150k
45.88***
8.39
Missing
26.42***
8.96
Employment
Unemployed
6.01
10.61
Not in Labor Force
32.27***
3.91
Population
CBSA Population (in 100s of Thousands)
0.01
0.03
State Population (in 100s of Thousands)
0.07***
0.02
CBSA Park Density (Acres in Parks  Gross Acres)
Federal Recreation
0.70***
0.20
Federal Non-recreation
0.14
0.12
State Recreation
2.15**
0.96
State Non-recreation
1.30***
0.33
Fixed Effects
Region
Yes
Holiday
Yes
Day of Week
Yes
Month
Yes
Year
Yes
33,069
Sample
78
Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs)
* Significant at the 10 percent level
** Significant at the 5 percent level
*** Significant at the 1 percent level
1512 | P a g e
The effect of increases in protected land on recreation varies depending upon location, ownership and the
recreational management type. Increases in CBSA-level recreational lands managed by Federal and local
agencies have a positive and statistically significant effect on recreational time allocation. For instance, a
one percent increase in Federal and local recreational lands increases time spent recreating by an average
of 0.98 and 0.90 minutes per day, respectively. By contrast, Federal non-recreational lands have a
statistically insignificant and near zero effect on outdoor recreation, and local non-recreational lands have
a statistically significant and positive effect on time spent recreating. These results suggest that while
Federal non-recreational lands tend to be unappealing for recreational users, local non-recreational lands
may offer more opportunities for recreation, even if not explicitly designed for these purposes.
Elasticity of Demand to Recreational Land Supply
These results facilitate an analysis of the potential effect that transitioning lands from non-recreational
management to recreational management would have spent on time engaged in outdoor recreation. In
particular, this analysis estimated the elasticity of demand for time spent on recreation with respect to the
supply of recreation opportunities in terms of acreage of land managed for recreation. Next, the analysis
estimated the elasticity of demand with respect to the supply of recreation opportunities on land not
managed for recreation. The analysis then combined these two estimates, such that a one percent increase
in the supply of recreation on lands managed for recreation is balanced by a commensurate decrease in
the supply of recreation on lands not managed for recreation.
In this analysis, acreage of land managed for recreation serves as a proxy for outdoor recreation
opportunities. While a comprehensive, spatially explicit dataset of all recreation opportunities is not
available, the Protected Areas Database does provide a relatively comprehensive dataset for all recreation
area by ownership/administration. Similarly, the specific recreation opportunities associated with new
RMAs under the Proposed RMP and alternatives are not defined, and the acreage serves as a proxy for the
specific recreation opportunities that the BLM would implement over time. This analysis utilizes
elasticity estimates derived from acreage-based relationships, and applies the elasticity estimates to
acreage-based changes.
An elasticity represents the ratio of percent change in demand associated with a percent change in a
particular explanatory variable. In this case, by estimating an elasticity of demand for a change in
recreational land supply, this analysis provides a calculation of elasticity that can be applied to changes in
outdoor recreation area on BLM-administered lands to estimate corresponding changes in visitation. This
particular elasticity approach is the appropriate method, because it implicitly accounts for several factors
including current demand levels, current supply levels, and proportionate relationships between supply
and demand that capture scarcity of outdoor recreation opportunities by context.
Table P-4 summarizes the elasticity of demand for an increase in CBSA-level recreation for both
federally and locally protected lands in Oregon. These results suggest that a 10 percent increase in Federal
and local land managed for recreation would result in an increase in recreational time demand by
approximately 1.7 percent and 0.08 percent, respectively.
Table P-4. Elasticity of demand for shift in land from non-recreational to recreational management
Oregon
Land Conversion
Marginal Effect
Standard Error
Federal
0.1770***
0.0597
State
0.0083
0.0113
* Significant at the 10 percent level
** Significant at the 5 percent level
*** Significant at the 1 percent level
1513 | P a g e
ATUS data do not include sufficient sample sizes to limit outdoor recreation to only the most common
activities on BLM-administered lands. While including a broader range of activities such as team sports
provides sufficient sample size to calculate statistically significant elasticities, it also likely leads to lower
elasticity values than otherwise. This is because changes in Federal outdoor recreation areas are unlikely
to influence strongly the amount of time respondents to the survey spend on team sports. Because of this
data limitation, actual investments by the BLM in increasing the quantity and quality of outdoor
recreation facilities would likely generate greater demand response for those targeted activities than these
elasticity values predict.
Elasticity Application to the Proposed RMP and Alternatives
To apply these elasticity estimates to changes in total acreage in Recreation Management Areas (RMAs)
in the decision area under the Proposed RMP and alternatives, this analysis applied the elasticity to
current measures of RMA acreage by district and current outdoor recreation visitation by district. The
results are projected changes in visitation by district and activity type for the Proposed RMP and each
alternative. Table P-5 shows the number of visits over time (including long-term participation
projections), by district, alternative and implementation scenario. Total visits in 2012 were 5.3 million, as
shown for the No Action alternative. Under the Proposed RMP, applying the elasticity corresponding to
the proposed change in total RMA acreage, and taking into consideration long term and socioeconomic
projections, visits would reach 11.9 million in 2062.
Table P-5. Recreation visitation estimates for the Proposed RMP and alternatives by implementation
scenario
Alternative/
Proposed RMP
No Action
Phasing
N/A
20 years
Alt. A
50 years
Alt. B
Alt. C.
N/A
20 years
50 years
1514 | P a g e
Geography
Totals
Coos Bay
Eugene
Klamath Falls
Medford
Roseburg
Salem
Totals
Coos Bay
Eugene
Klamath Falls
Medford
Roseburg
Salem
Totals
Coos Bay
Eugene
Klamath Falls
Medford
Roseburg
Salem
Totals
Coos Bay
Eugene
Klamath Falls
Medford
Roseburg
Salem
Totals
Coos Bay
Eugene
Klamath Falls
Medford
Roseburg
Salem
Totals
2012
5,300,902
594,958
937,639
125,260
1,144,697
982,089
1,516,259
5,300,902
594,958
937,639
125,260
1,144,697
982,089
1,516,259
5,300,902
594,958
937,639
125,260
1,144,697
982,089
1,516,259
5,300,902
594,958
937,639
125,260
1,144,697
982,089
1,516,259
5,300,902
594,958
937,639
125,260
1,144,697
982,089
1,516,259
5,300,902
2020
5,753,782
645,788
1,017,746
135,962
1,242,494
1,065,993
1,645,800
5,426,063
605,178
948,389
126,737
1,210,845
994,950
1,539,964
5,639,043
630,979
991,705
132,503
1,237,450
1,039,526
1,606,878
5,753,782
645,788
1,017,746
135,962
1,242,494
1,065,993
1,645,800
6,670,021
694,162
1,005,720
137,003
1,659,789
1,445,897
1,727,449
6,074,572
2030
6,356,367
713,420
1,124,333
150,201
1,372,618
1,177,633
1,818,162
5,498,638
608,573
947,091
126,614
1,275,074
995,577
1,545,710
6,056,062
675,301
1,058,079
141,397
1,352,889
1,110,085
1,718,313
6,356,367
713,420
1,124,333
150,201
1,372,618
1,177,633
1,818,162
8,754,406
857,352
1,148,235
159,481
2,394,991
2,105,094
2,089,251
7,195,959
Year
2040
6,907,409
775,268
1,221,803
163,222
1,491,612
1,279,724
1,975,781
5,861,327
647,733
1,006,640
134,586
1,369,209
1,058,596
1,644,562
6,374,680
708,617
1,107,162
147,980
1,446,681
1,162,518
1,801,723
6,907,409
775,268
1,221,803
163,222
1,491,612
1,279,724
1,975,781
9,832,047
953,891
1,260,814
175,708
2,726,066
2,398,949
2,316,619
8,396,812
2050
7,440,363
835,085
1,316,073
175,815
1,606,700
1,378,463
2,128,226
6,313,569
697,710
1,084,309
144,970
1,474,853
1,140,275
1,771,452
6,626,153
734,494
1,144,659
153,014
1,524,975
1,202,774
1,866,236
7,440,363
835,085
1,316,073
175,815
1,606,700
1,378,463
2,128,226
10,590,657
1,027,490
1,358,094
189,265
2,936,401
2,584,045
2,495,362
9,716,733
2060
7,998,835
897,766
1,414,857
189,012
1,727,299
1,481,930
2,287,970
6,787,464
750,080
1,165,697
155,851
1,585,555
1,225,863
1,904,416
6,845,459
756,857
1,176,752
157,325
1,595,343
1,237,330
1,921,851
7,998,835
897,766
1,414,857
189,012
1,727,299
1,481,930
2,287,970
11,385,589
1,104,613
1,460,033
203,471
3,156,807
2,778,003
2,682,664
11,223,446
2062
8,106,746
909,878
1,433,945
191,562
1,750,602
1,501,923
2,318,837
6,879,033
760,199
1,181,424
157,954
1,606,946
1,242,401
1,930,109
6,879,033
760,199
1,181,424
157,954
1,606,946
1,242,401
1,930,109
8,106,746
909,878
1,433,945
191,562
1,750,602
1,501,923
2,318,837
11,539,191
1,119,515
1,479,730
206,216
3,199,395
2,815,480
2,718,855
11,539,191
20 years
Alt. D
50 years
20 years
PRMP
50 years
Coos Bay
Eugene
Klamath Falls
Medford
Roseburg
Salem
Totals
Coos Bay
Eugene
Klamath Falls
Medford
Roseburg
Salem
Totals
Coos Bay
Eugene
Klamath Falls
Medford
Roseburg
Salem
Totals
Coos Bay
Eugene
Klamath Falls
Medford
Roseburg
Salem
Totals
Coos Bay
Eugene
Klamath Falls
Medford
Roseburg
Salem
594,958
937,639
125,260
1,144,697
982,089
1,516,259
5,300,902
594,958
937,639
125,260
1,144,697
982,089
1,516,259
5,300,902
594,958
937,639
125,260
1,144,697
982,089
1,516,259
5,300,902
594,958
937,639
125,260
1,144,697
982,089
1,516,259
5,300,902
594,958
937,639
125,260
1,144,697
982,089
1,516,259
654,696
987,872
133,288
1,420,945
1,229,984
1,647,788
7,102,064
732,915
1,036,792
153,883
1,897,088
1,448,437
1,832,948
6,225,837
667,016
992,707
140,222
1,524,192
1,219,060
1,682,640
6,775,898
754,662
1,002,908
135,939
1,833,536
1,199,706
1,849,147
6,111,641
683,049
983,849
132,407
1,503,758
1,104,643
1,703,935
747,372
1,080,146
147,228
1,796,812
1,565,794
1,858,606
9,885,177
960,774
1,240,215
201,301
2,976,501
2,138,673
2,367,712
7,591,859
781,807
1,102,640
164,137
2,037,286
1,551,747
1,954,243
9,031,513
1,000,206
1,146,872
157,727
2,803,352
1,545,055
2,378,301
7,292,978
812,091
1,074,076
145,650
1,983,613
1,289,731
1,987,817
848,538
1,185,103
162,884
2,191,572
1,917,985
2,090,731
11,211,130
1,080,183
1,374,220
226,248
3,429,336
2,445,101
2,656,041
9,099,124
911,452
1,234,147
191,172
2,586,529
1,912,663
2,263,161
10,170,006
1,125,351
1,260,052
173,730
3,216,161
1,730,891
2,663,821
8,568,921
951,694
1,179,125
160,893
2,487,515
1,491,803
2,297,890
961,437
1,305,912
180,736
2,618,609
2,298,523
2,351,515
12,076,146
1,163,527
1,480,251
243,704
3,693,933
2,633,758
2,860,973
10,790,132
1,058,969
1,388,751
221,952
3,191,024
2,313,305
2,616,130
10,954,692
1,212,180
1,357,274
187,135
3,464,310
1,864,441
2,869,353
9,979,781
1,106,246
1,301,521
178,517
3,032,892
1,717,017
2,643,588
1,092,090
1,449,495
201,787
3,098,924
2,726,062
2,655,087
12,982,579
1,250,861
1,591,358
261,997
3,971,199
2,831,447
3,075,717
12,743,978
1,231,215
1,573,537
257,907
3,879,290
2,772,503
3,029,526
11,776,949
1,303,166
1,459,151
201,181
3,724,340
2,004,385
3,084,726
11,596,069
1,283,485
1,447,903
199,471
3,646,008
1,976,776
3,042,427
1,119,515
1,479,730
206,216
3,199,395
2,815,480
2,718,855
13,157,726
1,267,736
1,612,827
265,531
4,024,774
2,869,646
3,117,211
13,157,726
1,267,736
1,612,827
265,531
4,024,774
2,869,646
3,117,211
11,935,831
1,320,747
1,478,836
203,895
3,774,585
2,031,426
3,126,341
11,935,831
1,320,747
1,478,836
203,895
3,774,585
2,031,426
3,126,341
1515 | P a g e
Issue 2
How would the alternatives affect economic activity in the planning area derived from BLM-administered
lands?
1516 | P a g e
Table P-6. Employment by industry by district model area, 2012 (jobs)
District Model Area Name and Counties
Coos
Bay
Eugene
Klamath
Falls
Medford
Roseburg
SalemPortland
MSA
Planning
Area
Totals
Oregon
Totals
19,389
2,686
2,326
53,287
104,812
54,798
108,402
62,577
4,793
3,760
92,671
162,973
74,037
205,027
90,083
5,066
4,759
105,523
181,427
80,548
231,382
3,237
58
95
2,089
3,781
569
4,629
5,462
104
135
8,085
12,422
6,201
24,783
2,511
46
118
1,505
2,132
848
4,288
5,479
141
342
8,154
9,029
3,659
20,422
3,330
117
172
2,203
4,820
766
4,845
Benton,
Clatsop,
Lincoln,
Linn,
Marion,
Polk,
Tillamook
23,169
1,641
573
17,348
25,976
7,196
37,659
1,012
2,885
1,251
4,802
1,724
11,998
32,363
56,036
62,888
297
935
525
1,465
341
4,209
6,041
9,080
10,986
1,884
206
996
492
1,159
624
2,612
5,722
4,165
8,046
1,703
330
1,851
1,928
1,649
434
3,114
9,432
10,394
17,638
2,380
24,267
59,627
68,062
88,560
22,639
35,034
84,604
94,646
129,504
30,005
38,482
92,582
104,672
143,216
30,783
2,246
10,172
1,587
7,786
2,668
16,440
66,660
107,560
117,952
361
4,605
3,598
25,433
391
3,670
2,048
21,741
509
5,276
7,108
46,972
36,728
121,260
50,742
228,956
53,762
257,275
902
3,825
858
5,014
626
8,245
25,709
45,178
51,711
3,548
13,739
2,319
11,155
3,038
27,496
80,764
142,059
160,824
2,295
7,286
40,276
11,722
25,283
186,049
2,237
4,643
31,881
9,162
14,346
145,525
2,966
7,275
46,527
19,309
65,321
359,408
58,908
116,243
1,147,490
106,599
240,396
1,957,157
119,825
288,801
2,221,563
Industry (Sector)
Coos,
Curry
Agriculture
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transportation and
Warehousing
Information
Finance and Insurance
Real Estate and Leasing
Professional Services
Management of Companies
Administrative and Waste
Services
Education Services
Health and Social Services
Arts, Entertainment, and
Recreation Services
Accommodation and Food
Services
Other Personal Services
Governments
Totals
SalemOther
Lane
Klamath
Jackson,
Josephine
Douglas
Clackamas,
Columbia,
Multnomah,
Washington,
Yamhill
Sources: MIG, Inc. (2013); Oregon Forest Resources Institute (2012) (forest products industries within greater Agriculture and Manufacturing throughout planning area)
1517 | P a g e
Table P-7. Earnings by industry by district model area, 2012 (millions of 2012 dollars)
District Model Area Name and Counties
Coos
Bay
Eugene
Klamath
Falls
Medford
Roseburg
SalemPortland
MSA
Planning
Area
Totals
Oregon
Totals
$753.0
$70.6
$435.8
$3,756.2
$9,827.7
$5,434.7
$3,713.7
$2,160.0
$129.1
$629.8
$5,687.7
$13,277.7
$6,578.9
$6,575.1
$2,750.4
$140.7
$766.7
$6,253.7
$14,212.3
$6,920.3
$7,374.1
$117.3
$3.8
$12.6
$73.6
$148.6
$30.6
$144.2
$152.5
$6.2
$15.3
$443.2
$802.8
$368.1
$726.6
$89.2
$2.5
$16.6
$52.8
$122.4
$38.7
$108.4
$139.6
$5.2
$51.2
$432.9
$493.2
$190.5
$633.7
$85.4
$3.6
$21.8
$89.2
$261.0
$32.3
$145.0
Benton,
Clatsop,
Lincoln,
Linn,
Marion,
Polk,
Tillamook
$822.9
$37.0
$76.6
$839.7
$1,621.9
$483.9
$1,103.7
$51.7
$163.1
$51.9
$209.7
$84.6
$584.9
$1,722.7
$2,868.5
$3,243.2
$13.7
$42.2
$17.1
$54.1
$22.2
$243.5
$323.0
$127.2
$459.8
$160.1
$8.9
$33.3
$14.6
$36.5
$44.1
$117.3
$222.8
$101.4
$253.0
$126.6
$17.0
$59.1
$23.5
$80.6
$30.6
$182.5
$432.4
$285.3
$779.7
$166.9
$2,011.3
$3,866.1
$1,118.3
$6,486.0
$2,488.9
$2,594.1
$4,978.8
$1,687.4
$8,149.7
$3,039.4
$2,769.1
$5,264.0
$1,910.4
$8,741.6
$3,086.4
$52.8
$318.6
$43.4
$200.7
$75.9
$462.7
$2,489.2
$3,643.3
$4,004.7
$4.5
$175.4
$73.4
$1,343.0
$4.6
$170.0
$34.5
$1,083.3
$7.0
$265.3
$160.8
$2,382.9
$1,057.4
$7,184.5
$1,342.4
$12,604.4
$1,390.8
$14,006.6
$10.6
$47.6
$8.9
$63.6
$9.2
$96.6
$592.8
$829.3
$920.4
$73.1
$295.0
$45.0
$234.9
$62.1
$581.3
$2,022.5
$3,313.9
$3,703.4
$66.5
$393.1
$1,507.7
$349.6
$1,315.2
$7,733.7
$55.1
$251.1
$1,198.0
$267.4
$742.6
$5,604.1
$78.7
$357.7
$1,789.7
$576.4
$3,433.6
$15,111.7
$2,564.4
$7,471.2
$65,067.0
$3,958.3
$13,964.4
$98,012.0
$4,380.6
$16,573.0
$108,412.3
Industry (Sector)
Coos,
Curry
Agriculture
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transportation and
Warehousing
Information
Finance and Insurance
Real Estate and Leasing
Professional Services
Management of Companies
Administrative and Waste
Services
Education Services
Health and Social Services
Arts, Entertainment, and
Recreation Services
Accommodation and Food
Services
Other Personal Services
Governments
Totals
SalemOther
Lane
Klamath
Jackson,
Josephine
Douglas
Clackamas,
Columbia,
Multnomah,
Washington,
Yamhill
Sources: MIG, Inc. (2013); Oregon Forest Resources Institute (2012) (forest products industries within greater Agriculture and Manufacturing throughout planning area)
1518 | P a g e
Table P-8. Employment contribution of BLM programs to district model areas by industry, 2012 (jobs)
District Model Area Name and Counties
Klamath
Coos Bay
Eugene
Medford Roseburg
Salem-Other
Falls
Benton,
Industry (Sector)
Clatsop,
Coos,
Jackson,
Lane
Klamath
Douglas
Lincoln, Linn,
Curry
Josephine
Marion, Polk,
Tillamook
Agriculture
420
272
73
265
272
255
Mining
31
6
16
16
12
Utilities
1
2
1
1
Construction
6
6
1
9
8
4
Manufacturing
132
113
7
70
141
76
Wholesale Trade
19
25
4
31
27
10
Retail Trade
17
25
5
33
27
13
Transportation and
87
141
20
135
126
58
Warehousing
Information
14
10
1
16
9
9
Finance and Insurance
6
9
2
18
8
5
Real Estate and Leasing
8
25
3
21
19
11
Professional Services
18
52
4
52
23
30
Management of Companies
11
14
1
12
8
9
Administrative and Waste
17
27
3
32
25
12
Services
Education Services
13
18
2
14
12
14
Health and Social Services
21
46
8
62
33
27
Arts, Entertainment, and
72
87
12
81
92
38
Recreation Services
Accommodation and Food
135
225
29
165
201
72
Services
Other Personal Services
27
34
5
35
26
21
Governments
195
227
63
429
287
214
1,249
1,363
245
1,496
1,362
Totals
891
Salem-Portland
MSA
Clackamas,
Columbia,
Multnomah,
Washington,
Yamhill
230
10
2
8
88
36
34
Planning
Area
Totals
1,788
92
7
42
626
153
153
150
717
17
22
28
33
17
75
70
113
213
72
35
151
19
37
92
234
115
498
340
1,167
28
48
1,297
177
1,464
7,904
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
1519 | P a g e
Table P-9. Earnings contribution of BLM programs to district model areas by industry, 2012 (millions of 2012 dollars)
District Model Area Name and Counties
Klamath
Salem-Portland
Coos Bay
Eugene
Medford
Roseburg
Salem-Other
Falls
MSA
Benton,
Clackamas,
Industry(Sector)
Clatsop,
Columbia,
Coos,
Jackson,
Lane
Klamath
Douglas
Lincoln, Linn,
Multnomah,
Curry
Josephine
Marion, Polk,
Washington,
Tillamook
Yamhill
Agriculture
$20.4
$12.7
$1.6
$10.1
$13.1
$12.6
$12.2
Mining
$1.0
$0.2
$0.0
$0.5
$0.2
$0.5
$0.3
Utilities
$0.1
$0.0
$0.0
$0.2
$0.1
$0.1
$0.2
Construction
$0.3
$0.4
$0.1
$0.5
$0.4
$0.2
$0.7
Manufacturing
$7.1
$6.6
$0.4
$3.7
$7.6
$4.6
$5.3
Wholesale Trade
$1.1
$1.5
$0.2
$1.7
$1.2
$0.7
$3.3
Retail Trade
$0.8
$1.2
$0.2
$1.3
$1.0
$0.7
$2.1
Transportation and
$2.5
$4.2
$0.6
$4.1
$3.5
$1.7
$4.8
Warehousing
Information
$0.6
$0.5
$0.1
$0.7
$0.4
$0.4
$1.1
Finance and Insurance
$0.3
$0.5
$0.1
$0.7
$0.3
$0.3
$1.4
Real Estate and Leasing
$0.3
$0.5
$0.1
$0.5
$0.3
$0.3
$0.8
Professional Services
$1.4
$1.5
$0.3
$2.4
$1.1
$1.3
$2.0
Management of Companies
$0.5
$0.7
$0.1
$0.6
$0.4
$0.4
$1.5
Administrative and Waste
$0.5
$1.0
$0.1
$0.9
$0.8
$0.4
$1.6
Services
Education Services
$0.3
$0.5
$0.0
$0.3
$0.3
$0.3
$0.6
Health and Social Services
$0.8
$2.4
$0.4
$3.0
$1.6
$1.3
$2.1
Arts, Entertainment, &
$1.6
$2.6
$0.3
$2.0
$2.5
$1.3
$3.6
Recreation Services
Accommodation & Food
$2.8
$4.8
$0.6
$3.4
$4.1
$1.5
$9.1
Services
Other Personal Services
$0.6
$1.0
$0.1
$1.0
$0.7
$0.5
$1.1
Governments
$13.9
$18.0
$4.2
$28.3
$19.2
$16.8
$4.0
Totals
$56.8
$60.7
$9.4
$66.0
$58.9
$45.9
$57.8
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
1520 | P a g e
Planning
Area
Totals
$82.6
$2.7
$0.8
$2.6
$35.2
$9.7
$7.2
$21.4
$3.8
$3.6
$2.7
$10.1
$4.0
$5.2
$2.4
$11.6
$14.0
$26.3
$5.1
$104.4
$355.3
Table P-10. Employment and earnings in the Coos Bay District model area for the Proposed RMP and alternatives
Program/Industry
2012
CurrentNo
Modified Action
BLM Program
Recreation
276
Grazing
Timber
710
Minerals
Agency
192
Expenditures
Federal Payments
20
to Counties*
Payments to
13
Coos
Payments to
7
Curry
Totals
1,198
Timber-Related Industries
Forestry, Logging,
& Support
232
Activities
Wood Products
131
Manufacturing
Paper
0
Manufacturing
Totals
363
Recreation-Related Industries
Arts,
Entertainment, &
71
Recreation
Services
Accommodation
133
& Food Services
Totals
204
Employment (Jobs)
2018
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
A
B
C
Alt.
D
Earnings (Millions of 2012 Constant Dollars)
2012
2018
CurrentNo
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
PRMP
Modified Action
A
B
C
D
PRMP
294
688
-
289
443
-
294
450
-
297
958
-
301
229
-
307
277
-
$7.0
$33.3
-
$7.5
$32.4
-
$7.3
$20.8
-
$7.5
$21.2
-
$7.5
$45.1
-
$7.6
$10.8
-
$7.8
$13.0
-
164
120
149
236
90
115
$13.1
$11.2
$8.2
$10.2
$16.0
$6.1
$3.3
51
31
40
73
20
28
$1.0
$2.5
$1.5
$2.0
$3.6
$1.0
$1.4
32
20
25
47
13
18
$0.6
$1.6
$1.0
$1.2
$2.3
$0.6
$0.9
18
11
14
26
7
10
$0.4
$0.9
$0.6
$0.7
$1.3
$0.4
$0.5
1,196
883
933
1,564
641
726
$54.4
$53.6
$37.9
$40.8
$72.4
$25.6
$25.5
204
145
143
284
75
93
$13.6
$11.9
$8.5
$8.4
$16.6
$4.4
$5.4
147
83
88
205
43
50
$7.3
$8.2
$4.6
$4.9
$11.4
$2.4
$2.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
351
228
231
489
118
143
$20.8
$20.1
$13.1
$13.2
$28.0
$6.8
$8.2
73
64
65
83
59
61
$1.6
$1.6
$1.2
$1.3
$2.2
$1.3
$1.4
140
134
138
148
135
139
$2.7
$2.9
$2.4
$2.8
$3.6
$3.8
$4.0
214
198
203
231
194
200
$4.4
$4.5
$3.6
$4.2
$5.8
$5.1
$5.4
* Federal payments include only those that would be paid under the O&C formula. Current has been modified as if O&C payments had been made in lieu of SRS payments.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
1521 | P a g e
Table P-11. Employment and earnings in the Eugene District model area for the Proposed RMP and alternatives
Program/Industry
2012
CurrentNo
Modified Action
BLM Program
Recreation
527
Grazing
Timber
480
Minerals
3
Agency
259
Expenditures
Federal Payments
28
to Lane County*
Totals
1,297
Timber-Related Industries
Forestry, Logging,
& Support
118
Activities
Wood Products
81
Manufacturing
Paper
13
Manufacturing
Totals
212
Recreation-Related Industries
Arts,
Entertainment, &
87
Recreation
Services
Accommodation
222
& Food Services
Totals
309
Employment (Jobs)
2018
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
A
B
C
Alt.
D
Earnings (Millions of 2012 Constant Dollars)
2012
2018
CurrentNo
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
PRMP
Modified Action
A
B
C
D
PRMP
561
1,156
3
551
884
3
561
1,164
3
548
2,022
3
549
664
3
546
1,008
3
$16.2
$23.2
$0.2
$17.2
$56.0
$0.2
$16.9
$42.8
$0.2
$17.2
$56.4
$0.2
$16.8
$97.9
$0.2
$16.9
$32.2
$0.2
$16.8
$49.0
$0.2
435
284
331
485
279
367
$15.2
$25.5
$16.7
$19.5
$28.5
$16.4
$8.1
71
43
55
102
28
39
$1.9
$4.9
$3.0
$3.8
$7.1
$2.0
$2.7
2,226
1,764
2,115
3,160
1,524
1,963
$56.7
$103.8
$79.5
$97.0
$150.4
$67.6
$76.7
260
199
251
453
154
230
$6.8
$15.1
$11.5
$14.6
$26.3
$8.9
$13.3
205
155
216
362
111
166
$4.5
$11.3
$8.5
$11.9
$20.0
$6.1
$9.1
38
30
38
65
23
38
$1.2
$3.5
$2.7
$3.5
$6.0
$2.1
$3.5
503
383
505
881
288
433
$12.5
$29.9
$22.8
$30.0
$52.3
$17.2
$25.9
123
108
122
161
98
113
$2.6
$4.3
$3.4
$4.3
$6.5
$3.3
$4.0
250
236
244
254
233
235
$4.8
$5.3
$4.3
$5.2
$5.6
$5.7
$5.3
373
344
367
415
331
347
$7.4
$9.7
$7.7
$9.6
$12.1
$9.0
$9.3
* Federal payments include only those that would be paid under the O&C formula. Current has been modified as if O&C payments had been made in lieu of SRS payments.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
1522 | P a g e
Table P-12. Employment and earnings in the Klamath Falls Field Office model area for the Proposed RMP and alternatives
Program/Industry
2012
CurrentNo
Modified Action
BLM Program
Recreation
60
Grazing
55
Timber
40
Minerals
Agency
71
Expenditures
Federal Payments
to Klamath
4
County*
Totals
231
Timber-Related Industries
Forestry, Logging,
& Support
15
Activities
Wood Products
6
Manufacturing
Paper
Manufacturing
Totals
21
Recreation-Related Industries
Arts,
Entertainment, &
12
Recreation
Services
Accommodation
28
& Food Services
Totals
40
Employment (Jobs)
2018
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
A
B
C
Earnings (Millions of 2012 Constant Dollars)
2012
2018
CurrentNo
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
PRMP
Modified Action
A
B
C
D
Alt.
D
PRMP
64
55
75
63
55
25
64
55
62
63
55
74
65
49
62
55
56
$1.60
0.8
$1.90
$1.7
$0.8
$3.5
$1.7
$0.8
$1.2
$1.7
$0.8
$2.9
$1.7
$0.8
$3.5
$1.7
$2.3
$1.6
$0.8
$2.6
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
78
75
87
97
78
89
$4.20
$4.6
$4.4
$5.1
$5.7
$4.6
$2.1
11
7
9
17
5
6
$0.20
$0.6
$0.4
$0.5
$0.8
$0.2
$0.3
283
224
277
305
197
268
$8.70
$11.1
$8.3
$10.9
$12.5
$8.9
$7.5
23
10
20
24
17
19
$0.90
$1.3
$0.6
$1.2
$1.4
$1.0
$1.1
16
4
12
14
8
10
$0.30
$0.9
$0.2
$0.7
$0.8
$0.5
$0.6
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
39
13
32
38
26
29
$1.20
$2.2
$0.7
$1.9
$2.2
$1.5
$1.7
14
12
14
14
13
13
$0.30
$0.3
$0.2
$0.3
$0.4
$0.4
$0.3
31
30
31
31
30
30
$0.60
$0.6
$0.5
$0.6
$0.7
$0.8
$0.6
45
41
45
45
43
42
$0.80
$0.9
$0.7
$0.9
$1.0
$1.1
$0.9
* Federal payments include only those that would be paid under the O&C formula. Current has been modified as if O&C payments had been made in lieu of SRS payments.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
1523 | P a g e
Table P-13. Employment and earnings in the Medford District model area for the Proposed RMP and alternatives
Program/Industry
2012
CurrentNo
Modified Action
BLM Program
Recreation
425
Grazing
40
Timber
340
Minerals
1
Agency
454
Expenditures
Federal Payments
66
to Counties*
Payments to
44
Jackson
Payments to
22
Josephine
Totals
1,326
Timber-Related Industries
Forestry, Logging,
& Support
80
Activities
Wood Products
59
Manufacturing
Paper
Manufacturing
Totals
139
Recreation-Related Industries
Arts,
Entertainment, &
80
Recreation
Services
Accommodation
159
& Food Services
Totals
239
Employment (Jobs)
2018
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
A
B
C
Earnings (Millions of 2012 Constant Dollars)
2012
2018
CurrentNo
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
PRMP
Modified Action
A
B
C
D
Alt.
D
PRMP
453
40
1,384
1
452
40
598
1
453
40
931
1
502
40
998
1
531
471
1
525
40
739
1
$12.20
0.6
$15.80
<$0.0
$12.9
$0.6
$64.6
<$0.0
$12.9
$0.6
$27.9
<$0.0
$12.9
$0.6
$43.5
<$0.0
$14.4
$0.6
$46.6
<$0.0
$15.2
$22.0
<$0.0
$15.0
$0.6
$34.5
<$0.0
641
560
641
686
514
682
$27.20
$38.4
$33.6
$38.4
$41.1
$30.8
$17.8
170
103
133
246
68
93
$2.90
$7.4
$4.5
$5.8
$10.7
$3.0
$4.1
114
69
89
165
46
63
$1.60
$4.1
$2.5
$3.2
$5.9
$1.6
$2.2
56
34
44
81
22
31
$1.30
$3.3
$2.0
$2.6
$4.8
$1.3
$1.8
2,688
1,753
2,199
2,473
1,586
2,081
$58.60
$124.0
$79.5
$101.3
$113.4
$71.0
$71.9
271
122
186
204
96
164
$4.60
$15.9
$7.1
$10.9
$11.9
$5.6
$9.6
289
121
192
202
96
139
$3.30
$16.0
$6.7
$10.6
$11.2
$5.3
$7.7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
560
243
377
406
191
303
$7.90
$31.9
$13.8
$21.5
$23.1
$10.9
$17.3
132
96
112
123
101
112
$2.00
$4.4
$2.5
$3.4
$4.5
$3.9
$4.3
187
175
183
205
196
199
$3.30
$3.8
$3.4
$3.8
$6.3
$7.4
$7.0
320
272
295
328
297
311
$5.30
$8.2
$5.9
$7.1
$10.9
$11.3
$11.3
* Federal payments include only those that would be paid under the O&C formula. Current has been modified as if O&C payments had been made in lieu of SRS payments.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
1524 | P a g e
Table P-14. Employment and earnings in the Roseburg District model area for the Proposed RMP and alternatives
Program/Industry
2012
CurrentNo
Modified Action
BLM Program
Recreation
507
Grazing
Timber
488
Minerals
2
Agency
176
Expenditures
Federal Payments
to Douglas
51
County*
Totals
1,225
Timber-Related Industries
Forestry, Logging,
& Support
147
Activities
Wood Products
133
Manufacturing
Paper
Manufacturing
Totals
280
Recreation-Related Industries
Arts,
Entertainment, &
92
Recreation
Services
Accommodation
197
& Food Services
Totals
289
540
Employment (Jobs)
2018
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
A
B
C
530
540
Earnings (Millions of 2012 Constant Dollars)
2012
2018
CurrentNo
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
PRMP
Modified Action
A
B
C
D
Alt.
D
603
599
554
$13.6
$14.5
$14.2
$14.5
$16.2
PRMP
$16.1
$14.9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
770
2
323
2
455
2
879
2
267
2
397
2
$23.5
$0.1
$37.0
$0.1
$15.5
$0.1
$21.9
$0.1
$42.2
$0.1
$12.8
$0.1
$19.1
$0.0
229
165
214
334
141
232
$12.0
$15.7
$11.3
$14.7
$22.8
$9.6
$5.7
131
79
103
190
53
72
$2.6
$6.7
$4.0
$5.2
$9.7
$2.7
$3.7
1,672
1,100
1,314
2,008
1,062
1,257
$51.8
$74.0
$45.2
$56.4
$91.1
$41.4
$43.3
208
87
135
236
78
124
$8.6
$12.1
$5.0
$7.8
$13.7
$4.5
$7.2
235
99
128
269
76
107
$7.4
$13.1
$5.5
$7.1
$15.0
$4.2
$5.9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
442
185
263
505
154
231
$16.0
$25.1
$10.5
$15.0
$28.7
$8.8
$13.1
107
89
96
121
97
95
$2.5
$3.2
$2.0
$2.6
$4.9
$3.8
$3.1
214
205
212
243
228
214
$4.0
$4.3
$3.5
$4.3
$8.0
$7.9
$5.7
321
294
307
364
325
309
$6.5
$7.5
$5.6
$6.9
$12.9
$11.7
$8.7
* Federal payments include only those that would be paid under the O&C formula. Current has been modified as if O&C payments had been made in lieu of SRS payments.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
1525 | P a g e
Table P-15. Employment and earnings in the Salem-Other district model area* for the Proposed RMP and alternatives
Program/Industry
2012
CurrentNo
Modified Action
BLM Program
Recreation
133
Grazing
Timber
432
Minerals
Agency
271
Expenditures
Federal Payments
15
to Counties†
Totals
851
Timber-Related Industries
Forestry, Logging,
& Support
125
Activities
Wood Products
56
Manufacturing
Paper
15
Manufacturing
Totals
196
Recreation-Related Industries
Arts,
Entertainment, &
38
Recreation
Services
Accommodation
71
& Food Services
Totals
109
141
Employment (Jobs)
2018
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
A
B
C
139
141
Earnings (Millions of 2012 Constant Dollars)
2012
2018
CurrentNo
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
PRMP
Modified Action
A
B
C
D
Alt.
D
141
143
145
$3.8
$4.0
$4.0
$4.0
$4.0
PRMP
$4.1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
353
459
503
630
425
483
$21.3
$17.5
$22.7
$24.9
$31.2
$21.1
$24.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
314
254
255
415
182
247
$17.4
$20.2
$16.3
$16.4
$26.7
$11.7
$15.9
37
23
29
54
15
21
$0.9
$2.4
$1.5
$1.9
$3.5
$1.0
$1.3
845
874
928
1,240
765
896
$43.5
$44.1
$44.5
$47.2
$65.4
$37.8
$45.4
101
132
146
182
120
137
$7.4
$5.9
$7.8
$8.6
$10.7
$7.1
$8.0
38
52
58
71
46
49
$3.1
$2.1
$2.9
$3.2
$3.9
$2.6
$2.7
17
20
21
28
20
25
$1.3
$1.5
$1.9
$2.0
$2.6
$1.8
$2.3
156
204
225
280
187
211
$11.8
$9.6
$12.5
$13.8
$17.2
$11.5
$13.1
36
40
42
49
38
41
$1.3
$1.2
$1.4
$1.5
$1.9
$1.4
$1.6
77
73
75
84
72
76
$1.5
$1.6
$1.3
$1.6
$2.0
$1.9
$2.0
113
113
117
133
110
117
$2.8
$2.8
$2.7
$3.1
$3.8
$3.4
$3.6
* Includes Benton, Clatsop, Lincoln, Linn, Marion, Polk, and Tillamook Counties
† Federal payments include only those that would be paid under the O&C formula. Current has been modified as if O&C payments had been made in lieu of SRS payments.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
1526 | P a g e
$4.1
Table P-16. Employment and earnings in the Salem-Portland MSA district model area* for the Proposed RMP and alternatives
Program/Industry
2012
CurrentNo
Modified Action
BLM Program
Recreation
854
Grazing
Timber
407
Minerals
Agency
Expenditures
Federal Payments
14
to Counties†
Totals
1,275
Timber-Related Industries
Forestry, Logging,
& Support
78
Activities
Wood Products
51
Manufacturing
Paper
13
Manufacturing
Totals
142
Recreation-Related Industries
Arts,
Entertainment, &
115
Recreation
Services
Accommodation
339
& Food Services
Totals
454
909
Employment (Jobs)
2018
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
A
B
C
893
909
Earnings (Millions of 2012 Constant Dollars)
2012
2018
CurrentNo
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
Alt.
PRMP
Modified Action
A
B
C
D
Alt.
D
909
923
932
$32.8
$34.9
$34.3
$34.9
$34.8
PRMP
$35.4
$35.8
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
295
396
422
532
372
406
$22.8
$16.6
$22.3
$23.7
$29.9
$20.9
$22.9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
37
22
29
54
15
20
$1.0
$2.5
$1.5
$1.9
$3.6
$1.0
$1.4
1,241
1,312
1,360
1,494
1,309
1,358
$56.5
$53.9
$58.0
$60.5
$68.3
$57.3
$60.0
62
81
90
112
74
84
$4.4
$3.6
$4.6
$5.1
$6.4
$4.2
$4.8
30
43
45
56
40
40
$2.8
$1.7
$2.4
$2.5
$3.1
$2.2
$2.2
11
15
15
20
14
16
$1.2
$1.0
$1.3
$1.4
$1.8
$1.3
$1.5
104
139
150
188
129
141
$8.5
$6.2
$8.3
$9.0
$11.3
$7.8
$8.5
118
119
122
127
122
124
$3.6
$3.5
$3.3
$3.8
$4.6
$4.7
$4.8
361
355
361
363
366
370
$9.1
$9.7
$8.1
$9.7
$11.4
$13.0
$13.0
478
474
484
490
488
494
$12.7
$13.2
$11.3
$13.5
$15.9
$17.7
$17.8
* Includes Clackamas, Columbia, Multnomah, Washington, and Yamhill Counties
† Federal payments include only those that would be paid under the O&C formula. Current has been modified as if O&C payments had been made in lieu of SRS payments.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
1527 | P a g e
Issue 5
How would the RMP alternatives affect the capacity and resiliency of different types of communities in
the planning area?
Census Places Random Selection
1528 | P a g e
Census Places Random Selection for Community Capacity and Resiliency
May 29, 2014
Table P-17. Stratified random sample of communities by population (selected cities highlighted)
Coos Bay
Powers
Port Orford
Lakeside
Gold Beach
Myrtle Point
Bandon
Coquille
Brookings
North Bend
Coos Bay
Eugene
Coburg
Lowell
Dunes City
Oakridge
Veneta
Creswell
Junction City
Florence
Cottage Grove
Lakeview
Chiloquin
Malin
Merrill
Klamath Falls
Medford
Gold Hill
Cave Junction
Rogue River
Jacksonville
Shady Cove
Phoenix
Talent
Eagle Point
Central Point
Ashland
Grants Pass
Roseburg
Glendale
Oakland
Yoncalla
Drain
Riddle
Canyonville
Myrtle Creek
Reedsport
Winston
47,218
689
1,133
1,699
2,253
2,514
3,066
3,866
6,336
9,695
15,967
39,724
1,035
1,045
1,303
3,205
4,561
5,031
5,392
8,466
9,686
23,223
734
805
844
20,840
101,776
1,220
1,883
2,131
2,785
2,904
4,538
6,066
8,469
17,169
20,078
34,533
49,031
874
927
1,047
1,151
1,185
1,884
3,439
4,154
5,379
Roseburg
Sutherlin
Roseburg
Salem
Johnson City
Manzanita
Monroe
Gaston
Yachats
Maywood Park
Garibaldi
Scio
Adair Village
Halsey
Aurora
Falls City
Donald
Yamhill
Lyons
Tangent
Siletz
Bay City
Rockaway Beach
Millersburg
Durham
Depoe Bay
Gearhart
Amity
Brownsville
Cannon Beach
Clatskanie
Banks
Turner
Mill
Rainier
Columbia City
North Plains
Carlton
Willamina
Waldport
Vernonia
Gervais
Dayton
Sublimity
Estacada
Jefferson
King City
Dundee
661,130
7,810
21,181
661,130
566
598
617
637
690
752
779
838
840
904
918
947
979
1,024
1,161
1,164
1,212
1,286
1,312
1,329
1,351
1,398
1,462
1,614
1,668
1,690
1,737
1,777
1,854
1,855
1,895
1,946
1,947
2,007
2,025
2,033
2,151
2,464
2,534
2,681
2,695
3,098
3,111
3,162
Salem
Hubbard
Mount Angel
Toledo
Harrisburg
Aumsville
Lafayette
Wood Village
Philomath
Tillamook
Warrenton
Sheridan
Seaside
Scappoose
Stayton
Lincoln City
Molalla
Independence
Fairview
Sweet Home
Silverton
Astoria
Monmouth
Sandy
Newport
Damascus
Gladstone
Cornelius
St. Helens
Happy Valley
Dallas
Lebanon
Canby
Troutdale
Sherwood
Wilsonville
Milwaukie
Forest Grove
Newberg
Woodburn
West Linn
Tualatin
Oregon City
McMinnville
Keizer
Lake Oswego
3,173
3,286
3,465
3,567
3,584
3,742
3,878
4,584
4,935
4,989
6,127
6,477
6,592
7,644
7,930
8,108
8,590
8,920
8,925
9,222
9,477
9,534
9,570
9,989
10,539
11,497
11,869
12,883
13,903
14,583
15,518
15,829
15,962
18,194
19,509
20,291
21,083
22,068
24,080
25,109
26,054
31,859
32,187
36,478
36,619
Grand Total
922,102
1529 | P a g e
Community Capacity/Resiliency Baseline
Table P-18. Community capacity/resiliency baseline inputs
Data Set
Population 2010, 2012
Population change 2000 to
2010/2012
Employment/Unemployment,
2012
Employment volatility
(diversity) current at place empt
by industry (possibly including
change over time)
Household income 2010 or
most recent from American
Community Survey (number of
households)
Median household income or
share in plus 3–5 $ income
brackets (e.g., $20–34, 35–50)
Poverty rate
Education (% population with
High School certificate; with a
4 year degree)
Community Health
Population with health
insurance (available from
census)
Community wealth:
Assessable tax base?
(needs to be expressed in
relative terms (e.g., per capita))
Recreation indicator?
Recreation demand/scarcity?
(per Rec. Planning Criteria)
1530 | P a g e
What Does This Tell Us?
Size, generally
= more community capacity
Growing pop, generally
= more capacity
High employment/low
unemployment, generally
= more capacity
More employment, employment
access = more capacity
More diversity in disconnected
industries (not all in one sector)
= more resiliency
Community Base Data Availability
County
Sub County
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Higher incomes, generally
= more capacity, more
resiliency.
Y
Y
Lower poverty = more capacity
Y
Y
Higher = more capacity, more
resiliency.
Y
Y
Healthy Communities have
more capacity, more resiliency
Y
Y
More wealth = more capacity,
more resiliency
Y
If available
Lower scarcity = more capacity
Y - Specifics to
be determined
If available
Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics
Table P-19. Selected socioeconomic characteristics for selected cities in western Oregon
Characteristic
Population
Total Population, 2012
Population, 2000
Population Change 2000–
2012
Age Distribution (2012)
Population 19 years and under
Population 20–64 years
Population 65 years and older
Totals
Median age (years)
Race
White alone, 2012
Minority
Housing
Total housing units
Occupied housing units
Vacant housing units
Owner-occupied
Renter-occupied
Median housing unit value ($)
Median gross rent ($)
Employment
Workers 16 years and over
In labor force
Unemployed
Occupation
Civilian employed population
16 years and over
Management, business,
science and arts occupations
Service occupations
Sales and office occupations
Natural resources,
construction, and
maintenance occupations
Production,
transportation, and
material moving
occupations
Jobs in a 5-mile Radius of
the Community by Sector
Accommodation and Food
Services
Administration and Support,
Waste Management and
Remediation
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing
and Hunting
Arts, Entertainment, and
Recreation
Construction
Educational Services
Finance and Insurance
Oregon
Number
%
3,836,628
3,421,399
415,229
Coquille
Number
%
3,874
4,184
Drain
Number
%
1,142
1,012
Florence
Number
%
8,412
7,263
12%
-310
-8%
130
13%
1,149
16%
967,636
2,328,465
540,527
3,836,628
38.4
25%
61%
14%
100%
756
2,312
806
3,874
47.4
20%
60%
21%
100%
296
594
252
1,142
42.2
26%
52%
22%
100%
1,036
4,293
3,083
8,412
57.6
12%
51%
37%
100%
3,272,707
563,921
85%
15%
3,460
414
89%
11%
1,084
58
95%
5%
7,820
592
93%
7%
1,673,593
1,512,718
160,875
945,824
566,894
246,100
854
N/A
100%
11%
63%
37%
1,953
1,592
361
1,104
488
154,100
478
50%
82%
18%
57%
25%
433
418
15
253
165
133,100
151
38%
97%
4%
61%
39%
5,207
4,438
769
2,766
1,672
201,200
1,606
62%
85%
15%
62%
38%
3,072,774
1,957,085
210,379
80%
67%
7%
3,281
1,794
71
85%
46%
2%
921
501
115
81%
44%
10%
7,600
3,244
258
90%
39%
3%
1,743,524
57%
1,723
44%
386
34%
2,967
35%
627,719
36%
399
23%
62
16%
653
22%
315,529
426,554
18%
25%
474
409
28%
24%
82
96
21%
25%
689
637
23%
21%
164,625
9%
343
20%
38
10%
347
12%
209,097
12%
98
6%
108
28%
641
22%
2,086
559
3,651
145,131
9%
81
4%
33
6%
1,008
28%
84,402
5%
50
2%
20
4%
141
4%
40,859
3%
182
9%
16
3%
86
2%
26,407
2%
4
0%
2
0%
89
2%
71,050
158,758
57,164
4%
10%
4%
85
115
87
4%
6%
4%
46
124
10
8%
22%
2%
142
171
103
4%
5%
3%
1531 | P a g e
Characteristic
Oregon
Number
%
Health Care and Social
230,433
Assistance
Information
33,677
Management of Companies
32,692
and Enterprises
Manufacturing
167,695
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil
1,596
and Gas Extraction
Other Services (excluding
60,136
Public Administration)
Professional, Scientific, and
77,910
Technical Services
91,242
Public Administration
Real Estate and Rental and
25,259
Leasing
181,165
Retail Trade
Transportation and
52,036
Warehousing
Utilities
8,692
74,290
Wholesale Trade
Jobs Distribution
Variability Compared to
Oregon (3)
Jobs by Earnings
395,867
$1,250 per month or less
621,915
$1,251 – $3,333 per month
More than $3,333 per month
602,812
Income
50,036
Median household income ($)
Persons below poverty level
584,059
Health Insurance Coverage
Civilian noninstitutionalized
3,796,881
population
With health insurance coverage 3,191,034
605,847
No health insurance coverage
Education (highest level obtained)
High School certificate
635,670
4 year degree
760,816
Assessed Value of Property
Total assessed value for tax
year 2013–14 ($)
Assessed Value Per Capita
(dollars)
Recreation
Outdoor recreation land in the
county where the community
8,605
is located (acres per 1,000
population)
1532 | P a g e
Coquille
Number
%
Drain
Number
%
Florence
Number
%
14%
254
12%
8
1%
702
19%
2%
12
1%
0
0%
110
3%
2%
64
3%
13
2%
21
1%
10%
378
18%
139
25%
39
1%
0%
1
0%
8
1%
0
0%
4%
81
4%
13
2%
154
4%
5%
27
1%
2
0%
70
2%
6%
480
23%
29
5%
93
3%
2%
5
0%
0
0%
102
3%
11%
125
6%
61
11%
525
14%
3%
45
2%
31
6%
43
1%
1%
5%
9
1
0%
0%
4
0
1%
0%
27
25
1%
1%
608%
267%
130%
24%
38%
37%
458
865
763
22%
41%
37%
163
257
139
29%
46%
25%
1,240
1,675
736
34%
46%
20%
15%
47,714
185
5%
36,964
97
8%
35,000
995
12%
99%
3,704
96%
1,142
100%
8,377
100%
84%
16%
3,240
464
84%
12%
911
231
80%
20%
6,996
1,381
83%
16%
17%
20%
2,371
682
61%
18%
466
0
41%
0%
3,541
0
42%
0%
202,372,480
52,373,224
837,548,331
52,239
45,861
99,566
5,012
16,069
5,098
Characteristic
Population
Total Population, 2012
Population, 2000
Population Change 2000–
2012
Age Distribution (2012)
Population 19 years and under
Population 20–64 years
Population 65 years and older
Totals
Median age (years)
Race
White alone, 2012
Minority
Housing
Total housing units
Occupied housing units
Vacant housing units
Owner-occupied
Renter-occupied
Median housing unit value ($)
Median gross rent ($)
Employment
Workers 16 years and over
In labor force
Unemployed
Occupation
Civilian employed population
16 years and over
Management, business,
science and arts occupations
Service occupations
Sales and office occupations
Natural resources,
construction, and maintenance
occupations
Production, transportation,
and material moving
occupations
Jobs in a 5-mile Radius of
the Community by Sector
Accommodation and Food
Services
Administration and Support,
Waste Management and
Remediation
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing
and Hunting
Arts, Entertainment, and
Recreation
Construction
Educational Services
Finance and Insurance
Health Care and Social
Assistance
Information
Management of Companies
and Enterprises
Gold Beach
#
%
2,563
1,897
Grants Pass
#
%
34,454
23,003
Junction City
#
%
5,445
4,721
666
35%
11,451
50%
664
1,401
498
2,563
41.1
26%
55%
19%
100%
8,918
18,533
7,003
34,454
40
26%
54%
20%
100%
2,334
229
91%
9%
32,246
2,178
1,327
1,029
298
674
355
220,100
336
52%
78%
22%
66%
34%
2,103
1,195
123
20,943
19,462
15%
1,481
8%
1,551
28%
3,110
57%
784
14%
5,445 100%
36.3
5,425
12,989
2,529
20,943
35
26%
62%
12%
100%
94%
6%
5,032
413
92%
8%
17,985
2,958
86%
14%
15,760
14,545
1,215
7,308
7,237
196,900
6,959
46%
92%
8%
50%
50%
2,250
2,049
201
990
1,059
179,400
984
41%
91%
9%
48%
52%
10,190
9,054
1,136
4,280
4,774
148,600
4,551
49%
89%
11%
47%
53%
82%
47%
5%
27,321
14,892
1,771
79%
55%
6%
4,188
2,747
386
77%
50%
7%
16,844
10,539
1,354
80%
50%
6%
1,072
42%
13,092
38%
2,361
43%
9,118
44%
284
26%
3,138
24%
443
19%
2,836
31%
257
304
24%
28%
3,273
3,687
25%
28%
461
565
20%
24%
2,213
2,002
24%
22%
134
13%
1,108
8%
498
21%
937
10%
93
9%
1,886
14%
394
17%
1,130
12%
1,394
17,216
724
Klamath Falls
#
%
12,205
18,710
229
16%
2,012
12%
690
6%
1,644
9%
6
0%
778
5%
413
3%
1,143
6%
37
3%
45
0%
488
4%
377
2%
4
0%
165
1%
86
1%
284
2%
49
93
25
4%
7%
2%
390
848
690
2%
5%
4%
641
1,218
149
5%
10%
1%
669
2,172
561
4%
12%
3%
154
11%
3,977
23%
912
7%
3,455
18%
42
3%
292
2%
27
0%
195
1%
0
0%
77
0%
44
0%
506
3%
1533 | P a g e
Characteristic
Gold Beach
#
%
103
7%
Manufacturing
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil
0
and Gas Extraction
Other Services (excluding
38
Public Administration)
Professional, Scientific, and
60
Technical Services
Public Administration
295
Real Estate and Rental and
15
Leasing
Retail Trade
188
Transportation and
35
Warehousing
Utilities
17
Wholesale Trade
4
Jobs Distribution Variability
Compared to Oregon (3)
Jobs by Earnings
$1,250 per month or less
467
$1,251 – $3,333 per month
565
More than $3,333 per month
362
Income
Median household income
50,958
(dollars)
Persons below poverty level
370
Health Insurance Coverage
Civilian non-institutionalized
2,516
population
With health insurance coverage
1,865
No health insurance coverage
651
Education (highest level obtained)
High School certificate
1,176
4 year degree
90
Assessed Value of Property
Total assessed value for tax
226,856,877
year 2013–14 ($)
Assessed Value Per Capita ($)
88,512
Recreation
Outdoor recreation land in the
county where the community
31,208
is located (acres per thousand
population)
1534 | P a g e
Grants Pass
#
%
1,358
8%
Junction City
#
%
3,053
25%
Klamath Falls
#
%
1,497
8%
0%
0
0%
13
0%
1
0%
3%
726
4%
448
4%
660
4%
4%
473
3%
251
2%
563
3%
21%
982
6%
202
2%
1,262
7%
1%
243
1%
175
1%
201
1%
13%
2,978
17%
2,055
17%
2,506
13%
3%
228
1%
397
3%
355
2%
1%
0%
76
878
0%
5%
42
901
0%
7%
143
516
1%
3%
183%
34%
41%
26%
96%
5,043
8,087
4,086
29%
47%
24%
32,991
123%
2,911
5,538
3,756
24%
45%
31%
35,067
117%
5,292
8,219
5,199
28%
44%
28%
31,971
14%
7,132
21%
1,239
23%
5,131
24%
98%
33,614
98%
5,342
98%
20,538
98%
73%
25%
28,272
5,342
84%
16%
4,320
1,022
79%
19%
16,245
4,338
78%
21%
46%
4%
30,251
4,617
88%
13%
1,770
87
33%
2%
5,634
1,173
27%
6%
2,624,936,968
355,651,839
1,264,904,779
76,187
65,317
60,397
8,612
5,098
34,321
Characteristic
Population
Total Population, 2012
Population, 2000
Population Change 2000–
2012
Age Distribution (2012)
Population 19 years and under
Population 20–64 years
Population 65 years and older
Totals
Median age (years)
Race
White alone, 2012
Minority
Housing
Total housing units
Occupied housing units
Vacant housing units
Owner-occupied
Renter-occupied
Median housing unit value ($)
Median gross rent ($)
Employment
Workers 16 years and over
In labor force
Unemployed
Occupation
Civilian employed population
16 years and over
Management, business,
science and arts occupations
Service occupations
Sales and office occupations
Natural resources,
construction, and maintenance
occupations
Production, transportation,
and material moving
occupations
Jobs in a Five Mile Radius
of the Community by Sector
Accommodation and Food
Services
Administration and Support,
Waste Management and
Remediation
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing
and Hunting
Arts, Entertainment, and
Recreation
Construction
Educational Services
Finance and Insurance
Health Care and Social
Assistance
Information
Management of Companies
and Enterprises
Lincoln City
#
%
7,926
7,437
Molalla
#
%
8,039
5,647
Rogue River
#
%
2,265
1,847
St. Helens City
#
%
12,807
10,019
489
6%
2,392
42%
418
23%
2,788
22%
1,729
4,575
1,622
7,926
44.6
21.8%
57.7%
20.5%
100%
2,598
4,654
787
8,039
32
32%
58%
10%
100%
500
1,158
607
2,265
45.6
22%
51%
27%
100%
3,737
8,043
1,027
12,807
33.3
29%
63%
8%
100%
6,931
995
87.4%
13%
7,520
519
94%
6%
2,103
162
93%
7%
11,512
1,295
89.9
10%
5,720
3,932
1,788
1,929
2,003
233,700
717
5,720
69%
31%
49%
51%
3,010
2,966
44
2,077
889
204,600
889
37%
99%
1%
70%
30%
1,132
997
135
567
430
177,900
420
50%
88%
12%
57%
43%
5,123
4,725
398
3,007
1,718
186,000
1,701
40%
92%
8%
59%
34%
6,500
3,963
505
82%
61%
8%
5,813
4,006
444
72%
69%
8%
1,838
877
100
81%
39%
4%
9,842
6,742
1,202
77%
53%
9%
3,458
44%
3,562
44%
777
34%
5,540
43%
649
19%
683
19%
195
25%
1,371
25%
1,091
1,268
32%
37%
696
819
20%
23%
146
236
19%
30%
852
1,669
15%
30%
253
7%
650
18%
102
13%
829
15%
197
6%
714
20%
98
13%
819
15%
5,709
3,804
1,304
3,729
1,721
30%
266
7%
104
8%
358
10%
240
4%
54
1%
58
4%
151
4%
12
0%
710
19%
62
5%
52
1%
661
12%
66
2%
19
1%
47
1%
226
159
48
4%
3%
1%
260
427
36
7%
11%
1%
117
202
19
9%
15%
1%
85
479
126
2%
13%
3%
674
12%
253
7%
141
11%
705
19%
53
1%
47
1%
32
2%
28
1%
1
0%
5
0%
0
0%
23
1%
1535 | P a g e
Characteristic
Lincoln City
#
%
47
1%
Manufacturing
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil
0
and Gas Extraction
Other Services (excluding
168
Public Administration)
Professional, Scientific, and
66
Technical Services
Public Administration
244
Real Estate and Rental and
233
Leasing
Retail Trade
1,030
Transportation and
46
Warehousing
Utilities
23
Wholesale Trade
57
Jobs Distribution Variability
Compared to Oregon (3)
Jobs by Earnings
$1,250 per month or less
2,147
$1,251 – $3,333 per month
2,575
More than $3,333 per month
987
Income
Median household income ($)
29,686
Persons below poverty level
1,616
Health Insurance Coverage
Civilian non-institutionalized
7,886
population
With health insurance coverage
6,299
No health insurance coverage
1,587
Education (highest level obtained)
High School certificate
1,745
4 year degree
1,119
Assessed Value of Property
Total assessed value for tax
1,521,308,480
year 2013–14 ($)
Assessed Value Per Capita ($)
191,939
Recreation
Outdoor recreation land in the
county where the community
4,906
is located (acres per 1,000
population)
1536 | P a g e
Molalla
#
Rogue River
#
%
198
15%
St. Helens City
#
%
512
14%
680
%
18%
0%
16
0%
19
1%
0
0%
3%
203
5%
52
4%
176
5%
1%
51
1%
49
4%
93
2%
4%
102
3%
40
3%
417
11%
4%
24
1%
20
2%
58
2%
18%
385
10%
132
10%
345
9%
1%
121
3%
25
2%
45
1%
0%
1%
0
98
0%
3%
0
15
0%
1%
0
29
0%
1%
217%
157%
49%
81%
38%
45%
17%
1,170
1,653
981
31%
43%
26%
465
523
316
36%
40%
24%
799
2,079
851
21%
56%
23%
20%
52,926
868
11%
32,426
398
18%
53,151
2,267
18%
99%
7,992
99%
2,265
100%
12,621
99%
80%
20%
6,664
1,328
83%
17%
1,884
381
83%
17%
10,706
1,915
84%
15%
22%
14%
6,930
780
86%
10%
695
0
31%
0%
2,420
1,288
19%
10%
490,884,897
135,999,651
815,441,324
61,063
60,044
63,672
1,682
4,416
565
Characteristic
Population
Total Population, 2012
Population, 2000
Population Change 2000–2012
Age Distribution (2012)
Population 19 years and under
Population 20–64 years
Population 65 years and older
Totals
Median age (years)
Race
White alone, 2012
Minority
Housing
Total housing units
Occupied housing units
Vacant housing units
Owner-occupied
Renter-occupied
Median housing unit value ($)
Median gross rent ($)
Employment
Workers 16 years and over
In labor force
Unemployed
Occupation
Civilian employed population 16 years and
over
Management, business, science and arts
occupations
Service occupations
Sales and office occupations
Natural resources, construction, and
maintenance occupations
Production, transportation, and material
moving occupations
Jobs in a Five Mile Radius of the
Community by Sector
Accommodation and Food Services
Administration & Support, Waste
Management and Remediation
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Construction
Educational Services
Finance and Insurance
Health Care and Social Assistance
Information
Management of Companies and Enterprises
Manufacturing
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas
Extraction
Other Services (excluding Public
Administration)
Professional, Scientific, and Technical
Services
Public Administration
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
Sublimity
#
%
2,683
2,148
535
25%
Winston
#
5,352
4,613
739
%
16%
495
1,346
842
2,683
51
18%
50%
31%
100%
1,674
3,012
666
5,352
31.9
31%
56%
12%
100%
2,623
60
98%
2%
4,980
372
93%
7%
1,134
1,085
49
731
354
247,300
347
42%
96%
4%
67%
33%
1,927
1,809
118
1,074
735
154,400
723
36%
94%
6%
59%
41%
2,292
1,089
61
85%
48%
3%
3,961
2,208
388
74%
41%
7%
1,016
38%
1,820
34%
370
36%
335
18%
156
276
15%
27%
337
680
19%
37%
115
11%
183
10%
99
10%
285
16%
17,216
4,032
2,012
12%
264
7%
778
5%
72
2%
45
165
390
848
690
3,977
292
77
1,358
0%
1%
2%
5%
4%
23%
2%
0%
8%
136
45
252
293
35
196
6
319
1,325
3%
1%
6%
7%
1%
5%
0%
8%
33%
0
0%
17
0%
726
4%
106
3%
473
3%
42
1%
982
243
6%
1%
48
30
1%
1%
1537 | P a g e
Characteristic
Sublimity
#
%
2,978
17%
228
1%
76
0%
878
5%
Winston
#
316
301
89
140
%
Retail Trade
8%
Transportation and Warehousing
7%
Utilities
2%
Wholesale Trade
3%
Jobs Distribution Variability Compared
96%
174%
to Oregon (3)
Jobs by Earnings
$1,250 per month or less
5,043
29%
846
21%
$1,251 – $3,333 per month
8,087
47%
1,542
38%
More than $3,333 per month
4,086
24%
1,644
41%
Income
Median household income ($)
58,708
31,627
Persons below poverty level
150
6%
1,584
30%
Health Insurance Coverage
Civilian non-institutionalized population
2,432
91%
5,345
100%
With health insurance coverage
2,229
92%
4,589
86%
No health insurance coverage
203
8%
756
14%
Education (highest level obtained)
High School certificate
2,519
94%
1,295
24%
4 year degree
816
30%
417
8%
Assessed Value of Property
Total assessed value for tax year 2013–14 ($) 187,046,485
223,555,844
Assessed Value Per Capita ($)
69,715
41,771
Recreation
Outdoor recreation land in the county where
the community is located (acres per 1,000
828
16,069
population)
Sources:
Assessed Property Value derived from individual County Assessors Offices Summary of Assessment and Tax Rolls.
Oregon Parks and Recreation Department. 2011. Oregon Statewide Outdoor Recreation Resource/Facility Bulletin Final Report.
A Component of the 2013–2017 Oregon Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan.
http://www.oregon.gov/oprd/PLANS/docs/scorp/2013-2018_SCORP/2013-2017-SCORP_App_B.pdf.
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04,
DP05, S1901 and S1701; generated by Joan Huston; using American FactFinder; http://factfinder2.census.gov; (May 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04,
DP05, S1901 and S1701; generated by Joan Huston; using American FactFinder; http://factfinder2.census.gov; (May 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; Census 2000, Summary File 1, Table DP05; generated by Joan Huston; using American FactFinder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (May 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau. 2013. OnTheMap Application. Longitudinal-Employer Household Dynamics Program.
http://onthemap.ces.census.gov/; generated by Clive Graham July 3, 2014.
Notes:
(1) All data are for 2012 with the exception of the Coquille Indian Tribe and Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians. For
these two tribes the most recent available data in all categories are the from 2009 five-year estimates.
(2) The population that is 16 years or older and available to work.
(3) A measure of difference in the distribution of jobs by sector in the 5-mile radius compared to the distribution of jobs for the
State. A higher number means a larger difference in distribution.
The American Community Survey data is derived from a sample of American households that contains a greater level of detailed
socioeconomic data than the decennial census. Where available, we used American Community Survey data from 2012, which is
informed by data collected over the prior 5 years and extrapolated for each community (for two tribes, data was only available
from 2009). Since the American Community Survey uses data derived from a sample of the population, and is not a true count of
the population like the decennial census, margins of error are associated with the extrapolated data. These margins of error vary
across the geography sampled; however, smaller populations generally experience larger margins of error when compared to
more populated geographies.
1538 | P a g e
Table P-20. Selected socioeconomic characteristics: federally recognized Tribes with land in the planning
area, 2009 and 2012 (1)
Characteristic
%
12%
24
25
-1
Oregon
Number
Population
Population, 2012, 2009 (1)
Population, 2000
Population Change
Age Distribution
Population 19 years and under
Population 20–64 years
Population 65 years and older
Median age (years)
Race
White alone
Minority (Non-white) population
Housing
Total housing units
Occupied housing units
Owner-occupied
Renter-occupied
Vacant housing units
Median value owner-occupied units ($)
Median gross rent ($)
Employment
Population in the labor force (2)
Unemployed
Occupation
Civilian employed population 16 years
and over
Management, business, science and
arts occupations
Service occupations
Sales and office occupations
Natural resources, construction, and
maintenance occupations
Production, transportation, and material
moving occupations
Jobs in a 5-mile Radius of the
Community by Sector
Accommodation & Food Services
Administration & Support, Waste
Management and Remediation
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and
Hunting
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Construction
Educational Services
Finance and Insurance
Health Care and Social Assistance
Information
Management of Companies and
Enterprises
Manufacturing
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas
Confederated
Tribes of Coos,
Lower Umpqua,
and Siuslaw
Indians
Number
%
3,836,628
3,421,399
415,229
-4%
Confederated
Tribes of the
Grand Ronde
Number
473
55
418
%
760%
Confederated
Tribes of the
Siletz Indians
Number
476
308
168
%
55%
967,636
2,328,465
540,527
38
25%
61%
14%
4
13
7
62
17%
54%
29%
164
278
31
28
35%
59%
7%
193
243
40
29
41%
51%
8%
3,272,707
563,921
85%
15%
12
12
50%
50%
92
381
19%
81%
56
420
12%
88%
90%
57%
34%
10%
15
15
3
12
0
100%
20%
80%
0%
1,673,593
1,512,718
945,824
566,894
160,875
246,100
854
450
193
185
13
172
8
91,700
833
96%
7%
93%
4%
173
160
88
72
13
79,100
458
93%
55%
45%
8%
1,953,903
210,379
67%
7%
2
18
10%
90%
176
139
56%
44%
224
40
71%
13%
1,743,524
57%
0
0%
37
12%
184
58%
627,719
36%
0
0%
47
35%
55
30%
315,529
426,554
18%
25%
0
0
0%
0%
58
25
43%
19%
44
45
24%
25%
164,625
9%
0
0%
2
2%
29
16%
209,097
12%
0
0%
2
2%
11
6%
18,273
100%
2,168
100%
6,642
100%
145,131
9%
2,727
15%
1,331
61%
1,489
22%
84,402
5%
1,347
7%
21
1%
245
4%
40,859
3%
509
3%
107
5%
163
2%
26,407
71,050
158,758
57,164
230,433
33,677
2%
4%
10%
4%
14%
2%
214
609
1,195
415
4,169
331
1%
3%
7%
2%
23%
2%
10
50
8
26
2
0%
0%
2%
0%
1%
0%
679
266
280
58
715
46
10%
4%
4%
1%
11%
1%
32,692
2%
184
1%
-
0%
1
0%
167,695
1,596
10%
0%
612
27
3%
0%
77
-
4%
0%
419
4
6%
0%
1539 | P a g e
Characteristic
Oregon
Number
Extraction
Other Services (excluding Public
Administration)
Professional, Scientific, and Technical
Services
Public Administration
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
Retail Trade
Transportation and Warehousing
Utilities
Wholesale Trade
Jobs Distribution Concentration
Compared to Oregon (3)
Jobs by Earnings
$1,250 per month or less
$1,251 – $3,333 per month
More than $3,333 per month
Income
Median household income ($)
Persons below poverty level
Health Insurance Coverage
With health insurance coverage
No health insurance coverage
Education (highest level obtained)
High School certificate
4 year degree
Recreation
Outdoor recreation land in the county
where the community is located (acres
per 1,000 population)
1540 | P a g e
%
Confederated
Tribes of Coos,
Lower Umpqua,
and Siuslaw
Indians
Number
%
Confederated
Tribes of the
Grand Ronde
Number
%
Confederated
Tribes of the
Siletz Indians
Number
%
60,136
4%
598
3%
17
1%
190
3%
77,910
5%
427
2%
7
0%
81
1%
91,242
25,259
181,165
52,036
8,692
74,290
6%
2%
11%
3%
1%
5%
1,062
291
2,439
686
137
294
6%
2%
13%
4%
1%
2%
370
3
86
35
13
5
17%
0%
4%
2%
1%
0%
536
160
1,035
200
13
62
8%
2%
16%
3%
0%
1%
51%
554%
99%
395,867
621,915
602,812
24%
38%
37%
5,611
8,030
4,632
31%
44%
25%
245
1,121
802
11%
52%
37%
2,272
2,728
1,642
34%
41%
25%
50,036
584,059
15%
15,938
6
25%
24,861
130
28%
39,000
81
18%
3,191,034
605,847
84%
16%
22
2
92%
8%
379
94
80%
20%
335
141
70%
30%
635,670
760,816
17%
20%
7
0
29%
0%
157
18
33%
4%
97
25
20%
5%
8,605
5,012
18,487
4,906
Characteristic
Population
Population, 2012, 2009 (1)
Population, 2000
Population Change
Age Distribution
Population 19 years and under
Population 20–64 years
Population 65 years and older
Median age (years)
Race
White alone
Minority (Non-white) population
Housing
Total housing units
Occupied housing units
Owner-occupied
Renter-occupied
Vacant housing units
Median value owner-occupied units ($)
Median gross rent ($)
Employment
Population in the labor force (2)
Unemployed
Occupation
Civilian employed population 16 years
and over
Management, business, science and
arts occupations
Service occupations
Sales and office occupations
Natural resources, construction, and
maintenance occupations
Production, transportation, and material
moving occupations
Jobs in a 5-mile Radius of the
Community by Sector
Accommodation & Food Services
Administration & Support, Waste
Management and Remediation
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing &
Hunting
Arts, Entertainment, & Recreation
Construction
Information
Educational Services
Finance and Insurance
Health Care and Social Assistance
Information
Management of Companies and
Enterprises
Manufacturing
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas
Extraction
Confederated
Tribes of Warm
Springs
Reservation of
Oregon
#
%
3,960
3,314
646
19%
Coquille Indian
Tribe
#
%
297
258
39
15%
Cow Creek Band
of Umpqua Tribe
of Indians
#
%
21
22
-1
-5%
Klamath Tribes
#
%
17
9
8
89%
1,473
2,235
252
27
37%
56%
6%
103
156
38
30
35%
53%
13%
3
12
6
62
14%
57%
29%
0
7
10
70
0%
41%
59%
303
3,657
8%
92%
131
166
44%
56%
21
0
100%
0%
6
11
35%
65%
1,157
1,037
650
387
120
103,200
673
90%
63%
37%
10%
112
102
52
50
10
152,800
483
91%
16%
49%
9%
9
9
7
2
0
387,500
N/A
100%
78%
22%
0%
14
14
4
10
0
275,000
371
100%
29%
71%
0%
1,748
474
64%
17%
108
14
51%
7%
7
0
33%
0%
5
1
29%
6%
1,274
47%
94
44%
7
33%
4
24%
267
21%
24
23%
0
0%
2
50%
433
287
34%
23%
30
22
28%
24%
5
2
71%
29%
0
0
0%
0%
86
7%
1
20%
0
0%
0
0%
201
16%
14
15%
0
0%
2
50%
2,250
100%
17,768
100%
27,040
100%
17,418
100%
331
15%
2,661
15%
2,682
10%
1,516
9%
29
1%
1,240
7%
1,377
5%
1,076
6%
189
8%
601
3%
899
3%
222
1%
6
51
4
102
22
43
4
0%
2%
0%
5%
1%
2%
0%
136
627
221
1,205
375
3,891
221
1%
4%
1%
7%
2%
22%
1%
222
954
299
1,930
760
5,051
299
1%
4%
1%
7%
3%
19%
1%
383
550
193
1,447
557
3,414
193
2%
3%
1%
8%
3%
20%
1%
-
0%
164
1%
532
2%
499
3%
273
12%
940
5%
3,106
11%
1,419
8%
1
0%
44
0%
91
0%
1
0%
1541 | P a g e
Characteristic
Confederated
Tribes of Warm
Springs
Reservation of
Oregon
#
%
Coquille Indian
Tribe
Cow Creek Band
of Umpqua Tribe
of Indians
Klamath Tribes
#
%
#
%
#
%
Other Services (excluding Public
11
0%
538
3%
874
3%
620
4%
Administration)
Professional, Scientific, and Technical
31
1%
414
2%
658
2%
552
3%
Services
Public Administration
890
40%
1,067
6%
2,558
9%
1,404
8%
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
0%
218
1%
339
1%
189
1%
Retail Trade
39
2%
2,343
13%
3,120
12%
2,523
14%
Transportation and Warehousing
13
1%
696
4%
887
3%
313
2%
Utilities
101
4%
83
0%
198
1%
112
1%
Wholesale Trade
114
5%
304
2%
503
2%
428
2%
Jobs Distribution Concentration
267%
55%
39%
117%
Compared to Oregon (3)
Jobs by Earnings
$1,250 per month or less
407
18%
5,351
30%
7,077
26%
4,903
28%
$1,251 – $3,333 per month
1,199
53%
7,779
44%
11,693
43%
7,835
45%
More than $3,333 per month
644
29%
4,638
26%
8,270
31%
4,680
27%
Income
Median household income ($)
47,526
39,346
22,250
6,944
Persons below poverty level
1,069
28%
67
23%
0
0%
9
53%
Health Insurance Coverage
With health insurance coverage
2,535
65%
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
14
82%
No health insurance coverage
1,369
35%
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3
18%
Education (highest level obtained)
High School certificate
664
17%
69
23%
7
33%
0
0%
4 year degree
193
5%
15
5%
2
10%
9
53%
Recreation
Outdoor recreation land in the county
where the community is located (acres
1,682
5,012
16,069
34,321
per 1,000 population)
Notes:
(1) All data are for 2012 with the exception of the Coquille Indian Tribe and Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians. For
these two tribes the most recent available data in all categories are the from 2009 five-year estimates.
(2) The population that is 16 years or older and available to work.
(3) A measure of difference in the distribution of jobs by sector in the 5-mile radius compared to the distribution of jobs for the
State. A higher number means a larger difference in distribution.
Sources:
Oregon Parks and Recreation Department. 2011. Oregon Statewide Outdoor Recreation Resource/Facility Bulletin Final Report.
A Component of the 2013-2017 Oregon Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan.
http://www.oregon.gov/oprd/PLANS/docs/scorp/2013-2018_SCORP/2013-2017-SCORP_App_B.pdf.
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04,
DP05, S1901 and S1701; generated by Joan Huston; using American FactFinder; http://factfinder2.census.gov; (May 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04,
DP05, S1901 and S1701; generated by Joan Huston; using American FactFinder; http://factfinder2.census.gov; (May 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; Census 2000, Summary File 1, Table DP05; generated by Joan Huston; using American FactFinder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (May 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau. 2013. OnTheMap Application. Longitudinal-Employer Household Dynamics Program.
http://onthemap.ces.census.gov/; generated by Clive Graham July 3, 2014.
The American Community Survey data is derived from a sample of American households that contains a
greater level of detailed socioeconomic data than the decennial census. Where available, we used
American Community Survey data from 2012, which is informed by data collected over the prior 5 years
and extrapolated for each community (for two tribes, data was only available from 2009). Since the
1542 | P a g e
American Community Survey uses data derived from a sample of the population, and is not a true count
of the population like the decennial census, margins of error are associated with the extrapolated data.
These margins of error vary across the geography sampled; however, smaller populations generally
experience larger margins of error when compared to more populated geographies.
Community Profiles
The BLM developed brief, introductory geographic and economic profiles of the selected communities to
have some familiarity with the communities prior to the interviews. For the tribes, the section contains
profiles only for those that opted to participate in the interviews.
Coquille
Coquille is the county seat of Coos County, and is located on Oregon Route 42 along the Coquille River
approximately 20 miles downstream from the Pacific Ocean. Deriving its name from the Coquille Indian
Tribe, the city’s primary economic driver is the timber industry. Other economic activities include
healthcare and tourism.
Area: 2.80 square miles. 2012 population: 3,874. http://cityofcoquille.org/
Drain
Drain is in Douglas County, approximately 20 miles south of Eugene on Oregon Routes 99 and 38 at a
pass in the coast range created by Pass Creek, a tributary of the Umpqua River. Drain is named after town
founder and politician Charles J. Drain. The North Douglas School District is one of the major employers
in the city, which is home to both the combined elementary/middle school and the high school.
Area: 0.61 square miles. 2012 population: 1,142. http://www.drainoregon.org/
Florence
Florence is located in Lane County on the Oregon coast at the mouth of the Siuslaw River roughly due
east of Eugene, is located along U.S. Highway 101. The Siuslaw Tribe of Native Americans formerly
inhabited the Florence area. The city’s traditional economy was based on timber and fishing, but both
have declined, and the city now focuses on tourism. The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua
and Siuslaw Indians own the Three Rivers Casino located just east of the city.
Area: 5.87 square miles. 2012 population: 8,412. http://www.ci.florence.or.us/
Gold Beach
Gold Beach is the county seat of Curry County and is located on the Oregon coast approximately 50 miles
north of the California border. The community was originally named Ellensburg in the 1850s, but later
took the name Gold Beach after a beach near the mouth of the Rogue River where placer mines extracted
gold. Gold Beach is a center for fishing, ocean charters, and outdoor recreation. The primary industries in
the city are tourism and government.
Area: 2.76 square miles. Population 2012: 2,563. http://www.goldbeachoregon.gov/
Grants Pass
Grants Pass is the county seat of Josephine County and is located on Interstate 5, northwest of Medford.
Incorporated in 1887, the city was named in honor of General Ulysses S. Grant. Attractions include the
Rogue River and the nearby Oregon Caves National Monument. Once a timber-based community, the
economy is currently a mix of light manufacturing, secondary wood products, retail trade, tourism,
recreation, and service-based industries.
Area: 11.03 square miles. Population 2012: 34,454. https://www.grantspassoregon.gov/
1543 | P a g e
Klamath Falls
Klamath Falls is the county seat of Klamath County, and is located on the southeast shore of the Upper
Klamath Lake, about 25 miles north of California. Founded in 1867 under the name Linkville, the city
was renamed Klamath Falls in 1893. Logging was Klamath Falls’ first major industry, while tourism and
recreation have become current economic mainstays. The nearby Lava Beds National Monument and
Crater Lake National Park are common tourist destinations.
Area: 20.66 square miles. Population 2012: 20,943. http://ci.klamath-falls.or.us/
Junction City
Junction City is located in Lane County on U.S. Route 99 west of the Willamette River, approximately 15
miles northwest of Eugene. Agricultural land surrounds the city, which has a strong manufacturing base
including historic ties with the recreational vehicle industry. Incorporated in 1872, Junction City is also a
gateway to Oregon wine country.
Area: 2.36 square miles. 2012 population: 5,445. http://www.junctioncityoregon.gov/
Lincoln City
Lincoln City is located in Lane County on the Oregon coast approximately 60 miles from Salem and 90
miles from Portland. Lincoln City incorporated in 1965, uniting the cities of Delake, Oceanlake and Taft,
and the unincorporated communities of Cutler City and Nelscott. It is a beach and resort community;
tourism is the city’s primary industry. Lincoln City is also home to the Chinook Winds Casino operated
by the Confederated Tribes of the Siletz.
Area: 5.68 square miles. Population 2012: 7,926. http://www.lincolncity.org/
Molalla
Molalla is located in Clackamas County, 30 miles southeast of Portland. The city was named after the
Molalla River, which in turn was named for the Molalla, a Native American tribe that inhabited the area.
Descendants of the Molalla tribe are members of the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde. Historically,
lumber production was the community’s biggest industry. In recent years, the city has diversified its
economic base with manufacturing, commercial, tourism, and recreation, with Molalla as the gateway to
the Molalla River Recreation Corridor.
Area: 2.26 square miles. Population 2012: 8,039. http://www.cityofmolalla.com/
Rogue River
Rogue River is located in the western edge of Jackson County along U.S. Route 5. Formerly known as
Woodville the settlement changed to Rogue River. During the 1830s and 1840s, the area had become a
stopover for trappers and traders traveling from Fort Vancouver on the Columbia River south to
California along the Siskiyou Trail. Today’s Interstate 5 traces the route of that trail. Rogue River was
closely tied to the timber industry but is now seeing a shift to service and retail jobs.
Area: 0.97 square miles. Population 2012: 2,265. http://cityofrogueriver.org/
St. Helens
St. Helens is the county seat of Columbia County and is located about 30 miles north of Portland along the
Oregon-Washington border. Bounded by the Columbia River to the east, St. Helens is named for its view
of Mount St. Helens in Washington, approximately 40 miles away. The city has a strong focus on business
development, especially in its Downtown Historic District and through its Main Street Program. St.
Helens also offers a variety of tourism and recreation activities along the Columbia River.
Area: 5.51 square miles. Population 2012: 12,807. http://www.ci.st-helens.or.us/
1544 | P a g e
Sublimity
Sublimity is located in Marion County, about 15 miles east of Salem on a plateau on the western foothills
of the Oregon Cascades. The town incorporated in 1903. Sublimity was a center for the timber industry
through the 1980s, but is now a bedroom community for Salem.
Area: 0.93 square miles. Population 2012: 2,683. http://www.cityofsublimity.org/
Winston
Winston is located in Douglas County less than 10 miles south of Roseburg along the South Umpqua
River. Although separated by the river, Winston is often regarded as part of a single entity with nearby
Dillard and Willis Creek. Winston experienced significant growth when lumber mills began to open
towards the middle of the twentieth century, and it remains timber-dependent today.
Area: 2.65 square miles. Population 2012: 5,352. http://www.winstoncity.org/
Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon
The Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde’s reservation and other owned lands cover approximately
10,700 acres in Yamhill and Polk Counties. The population on these lands is approximately 470 (2012
Census), but tribal membership across Western Oregon is 5,000–6,000.
The Tribes’ vision is to be a tribal community providing responsible stewardship of human and natural
resources http://www.grandronde.org/ikanum/index.html (June 27, 2014). The Tribes’ sources of income
include the Spirit Mountain Casino, timber sales from tribal lands, and tourism. The Grand Ronde is
involved in community building functions such as housing, education, and health care.
http://www.grandronde.org/.
Coquille Indian Tribe of Coos County, Oregon
The Coquille Indian Tribe’s reservation and its tribal service area covers approximately 15,600 square
miles of Coos, Curry, Douglas, and Lane counties, with its main tribal campus in Southeastern Coos
County.
The Tribe is the second largest employer in Coos County, Oregon, with successful business ventures in
forestry, arts and exhibits, gaming and hospitality, assisted living and memory care, high-speed
telecommunications, and renewable energy. The Tribe also operates the Mill Resort & Casino in Coos
Bay and manages the Coquille Forest, comprised of 14 separate parcels of formerly BLM-administered
timberlands in eastern Coos County, totaling 5,410 acres. http://www.coquilletribe.org/.
Environmental Resources Management (ERM) sent letters to the Tribal Work Group of the Cooperating
Agencies Advisory Group, as well as to city officials of selected cities in the planning area. The BLM
included copies of these letters in the Draft RMP/EIS (pp. 1329–1331), and they are hereby incorporated
by reference.
1545 | P a g e
Interview Summaries
This appendix contains summaries of the interviews that the BLM conducted with communities in the
planning area.
Please note that, while the interviewees participated as representatives of their city or Tribe, they spoke as
individuals and not formally on behalf of the city elected officials or of the Tribal leaderships.
City of Coquille
Date: July 16, 2014
Participants:
Ben Marchant, City Manager; Coquille
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-21. City of Coquille interview
Question
Discussion/ Response
Coquille is challenged because its capacity is bound up with the economy of
southwestern Oregon, which has been in malaise since the mid-1980s. Ben
has been City Manager for two years and was hired in part to increase the
city’s capacity by, for example, diversifying the economy and attracting
families with children to move to the city. His sense of the history is that the
city’s economic heyday was in the early1980s; there were three mills, car
dealers, large retail stores. Now there is only one mill and many of the stores
are gone – in that sense the city is depressed. For a while, the city was under
development moratorium, but has since expanded its sewer treatment plant.
How do you view your
community’s ‘capacity,’
that is your community’s
ability to face changes,
respond to external and
internal stresses, create,
and take advantage of
opportunities, and meet its
needs?
The capacity data are somewhat inconsistent. The city lost population
(approximately 8%) between 2000 and 2012. The population is older and
there has been a decline in the 18 and under age cohort. Coquille had the
third lowest assessed value per capita among the 13 cities surveyed. On the
other hand, Ben said the tax base was healthy and household incomes are
relatively high such that the city does not meet the criteria for State
Community Development Block Grant funding because the city is above the
50% low- to moderate-income threshold for eligibility.
Ben feels that the growing elderly and retiree population require expensive
services from the city and that this has affected the schools budget (he
commented that the physics program had been cut).
The city’s remaining mill is a major employer (between 1/3 to 1/2 of all jobs
in the city). The other major employment sectors are government (Coquille
is the county seat) and institutional—employment at the area’s hospital.
Although Coquille is 10 miles off U.S. 101 (the coast highway), it does
attract visitors. The city offers a variety of options including summer
festivals, theatre, and antiquing.
1546 | P a g e
Question
Discussion/ Response
Ben feels that Coquille has a great sense of community with very strong
volunteer programs and ability to raise funds for charity. This undercurrent
of community is a testament to the city’s capacity to weather economic
challenges and work together to find solutions to problems.
As timber production has declined, the community is somewhat divided
between those who see the potential for a timber-based economy to come
back, and others who think that timber is not coming back and that the city
needs to adapt to the “new normal.” The latter group sees some hope in the
proposed Jordan Cove Energy Project in Coos Bay to export liquefied
natural gas.
How do you view your
community’s ‘resiliency,’
that is your community’s
ability to adapt to change
over time?
Ben feels that Oregon’s citizen-driven tax cap initiatives (Measure 5 and
Measure 50) limit government revenues and, as a result cities’ capacity to
provide services. For example, Ben said that important services like the
ambulance program were operating in the red. Coquille needs to become less
dependent on property tax revenues. Ben said that Curry County was in the
worst financial condition, with Coos, Josephine, and Douglas close behind.
The city’s one timber mill is sustained by logging on private land. The City
of Coquille owns approximately 800 acres of forestland on two parcels in
separate locations east and west of the city. The city plans a timber sale on
part of this land.
All cities in Coos County are members of watershed associations to sustain
and improve water quality. The associations focus on habitat restoration,
preventing silt and runoff, and best practices around the watershed.
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its capacity
and resiliency)?
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over time
affected your community?
In what ways?
Are there changes in the
ways that the BLM
manages its resources that
would increase your
community’s capacity and
resiliency?
Ben sees a sociopolitical divide between rural and urban areas in Western
Oregon; the urban areas progressing economically and the rural areas much
less. This could impact the resiliency of cities like Coquille in the future.
Ben said that the BLM’s management has a great effect on the community.
Coquille, like many cities in Western Oregon, sees restoring the O&C lands
to local management or to be managed for the benefit of local communities
as a major issue, because they see the effects of millions of dollars of
potential income that are lost every year. Local management would benefit
communities by helping to offset the property tax revenue caps.
Ben said he had seen harvest studies from the 1930s that would have allowed
for 10% of the forest to be harvested at a sustainable rate. In his view, the
steep decline in harvest since the 1990s has resulted in forests that are
overgrown, begging questions about how to manage this enormous resource.
Ben feels that there has been a transition within the BLM from a pragmatic
management approach to a more “idealistic” (let the forest be) mindset. He
sees this as flawed and somewhat inconsistent, for example, managed hunts
for some species and protections for others.
Ben said that if the BLM opened up more timberland for harvest it would
have positive direct and spillover effects on the local economy.
1547 | P a g e
Question
Discussion/ Response
BLM has very few trails and campgrounds near Coquille – Ben felt there are
more in the eastern part of the planning area. Ben feels that Coquille
residents would benefit from the availability of more access into the forest. It
could also be another attractor for tourists. The Coquille River provides
opportunities for recreational fishing.
1548 | P a g e
City of Gold Beach
Date: July 10, 2014
Participants:
Jodi Fritts-Matthey, City Administrator; City of Gold Beach
Will Newdall, Public Works Superintendent; City of Gold Beach
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-22. City of Gold Beach interview
Question
Discussion/Response
Gold Beach is a small city with limited capacity. Its population is
approximately 2,500 and it is located in Curry County, which has the
smallest population among Western Oregon counties – 22,300. Gold Beach
is the County seat, which provides some stability but, overall, there are only
approximately 1,400 jobs in a 5-mile radius of the city. According to the
Census, the city added approximately 660 people between 2000 and 2012.
How do you view your
community’s ‘capacity,’
that is your community’s
ability to face changes,
respond to external and
internal stresses, create,
and take advantage of
opportunities, and meet its
needs?
Jodi Fritts (Jodi) stated that Gold Beach used to be totally timber dependent.
In the mid-1980s, the city experienced a major economic setback when its
only timber mill burned down and was not rebuilt. The mill had provided
jobs for many residents, and its loss left a significant “economic hole that
has not been filled.” There are no longer means to process timber in Gold
Beach, and the closest mill is in Brookings, OR, roughly 30 miles away.
Jodi said that during the recession of the mid to late 2000s, the public sector
took a huge employment hit in the city and in the County, especially
considering their relatively low populations. She said that Gold Beach “lost
hundreds of Federal, State, local and school district jobs.” These job losses
have resulted in a severely stressed level of economic capacity. The Census
data state an unemployment rate of 5% for the city, but Jodi believes this is
low. Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (June 2013–May 2014)
indicate Curry County’s unemployment rate is between 10.0 and 11.9%,
putting the County’s rate above the State’s (7%).
Currently, the city’s major economic drivers are tourism and government.
Tourism is based on the beaches, hiking, horseback riding, and boating and
rafting.
1549 | P a g e
Question
How do you view your
community’s ‘resiliency,’
that is your community’s
ability to adapt to change
over time?
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its capacity
and resiliency)?
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over time
affected your community?
In what ways?
Are there changes in the
ways that the BLM
manages its resources that
would increase your
community’s capacity and
resiliency?
1550 | P a g e
Discussion/Response
Gold Beach has struggled to adapt from its former timber-reliant economy.
Jodi says that the city’s basket essentially had only one egg (the timber egg)
and that tourism jobs have not been equivalent replacements. She added that
the city has not recovered from the job losses during the recession; to her, it
was, and remains a “depression.” (Jodi cited the Grapes of Wrath in
describing the recession’s impacts).
Jodi states that the city is trying to grow its tourism economy. But, it is not
easy for a small, relatively isolated place with limited options and
opportunities. Growing tourism has been a “tough sell” among some
residents who hold on to the possibility of a return to a better economy
through logging.
In short, the city’s resiliency is extremely low.
The BLM only owns a small portion of land in the upper portion of Gold
Beach at the Rogue River National Recreation Trail. As such, the BLM’s
management has no effects on the city. The U.S. Forest Service has much
larger land holdings, approximately 70% of the land; but, to Jodi’s
knowledge, there have been no timber sales in recent years from U.S. Forest
Service land.
Some city residents look back fondly at the older timber-dependent
economy. But, in Jodi’s view, any effort by the BLM to contribute to the
city’s capacity is 30 years late.
The BLM has some land near Cape Blanco State Park (Cape Blanco
lighthouse), which is managed by the Oregon Parks and Recreation
Department, but this is some 30 miles north of Gold Beach.
Any small role the BLM had when the city’s mill was operating has now
gone.
The city is responsible for providing nearly all services within the city. The
city does not benefit directly from timber payments to counties. The only
services the county provides in the city are the jail and maintaining county
roads in the city (approximately 15% of the roads). The jail is important
because if it exceeds capacity inmates are released into Gold Beach.
If BLM’s management could result in increased payments to Curry County
then pressure on the County’s budget would decrease and make it more
likely that county services in the city are maintained.
City of Drain
Date: July 25, 2014
Participants:
Suzanne Anderson, Mayor; City of Drain
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Mayor Anderson provided written responses to the questions. These are provided verbatim, followed by
input from the personal interview.
Table P-23. City of Drain interview
Question
Discussion/Response
Written response
How do you view your
community’s ‘capacity,’
that is your community’s
ability to face changes,
respond to external and
internal stresses, create,
and take advantage of
opportunities, and meet its
needs?
In times of sustainable economic growth, our community has the ability to
take advantage of opportunities to create new jobs, businesses and focus on
increasing the overall health and prosperity of our community. Also, we can
focus on infrastructure improvements, including streets and utilities (electric,
water, sewer & communications).
Interview
Mayor Anderson (Suzanne) said she had lived in Douglas County all her life.
She said that unemployment in Drain was around 40% versus the 10% figure
cited in the data from the Census. She said the logging population had fallen
drastically, due to lack of demand and mechanization of the logging
industry.
Drain is down to only one working mill, Emerald Forest Products, which
trucks veneer in to be dried, and then ships the dried veneer back to other
plants to make plywood. Drain’s population is not growing and enrollment at
the city’s combined elementary/middle school and high school has declined
from about 500 to 345. Nevertheless, the school district remains one of the
largest employers.
Written response
How do you view your
community’s ‘resiliency,’
that is your community’s
ability to adapt to change
over time?
DIFFICULT! Significant changes (governmental policies, recession, etc.)
resulting in job loss and less income flows significantly affects our ability to
maintain community stability. When these changes occur the overall socioeconomic health of our community declines and it is very difficult to adapt
to changes without corresponding changes in governmental policies that
create opportunities for socio-economic growth.
Interview
It is difficult for a small city to actively “adapt.” The city did however have a
recent success— as much by chance as by effort. Malcolm Drilling, a
specialty-drilling contractor in the deep foundation industry, purchased
1551 | P a g e
Question
Discussion/Response
Drain’s former North Douglas Wood Products facility in 2013, and is now
one of the city’s major employers.
Local colleges are gearing more programs to help former loggers find the
assistance they need to start new careers, though the older generation loggers
are finding it difficult to transfer their skills into new trades or professions.
Mayor Anderson has seen the city of Drain struggle as mills closed and
Douglas County lost funding from timber receipts. The city is unable to
fund a police force and therefore contracts with the County’s deputies to fill
this need. The countywide library system has also suffered, and lacks
funding to upgrade computers and other services. Other services the county
provides that affect the city are the jail, health and social services, and
juvenile services.
Written response
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its capacity
and resiliency)?
It has a direct effect on our community. BLM’s statutory authority for
managing resources on O&C and Coos Bay Wagon Road (CBWR) lands is
the O&C Act of 1937. This law dedicates the O&C and CBWR lands to
permanent timber production through long-term sustained forestry to help
support local communities and O&C county governments with revenues
from the sale of timber and by supplying timber to local industries for the
purpose of creating jobs and income. BLM’s management direction must,
therefore, give the highest priority to achieving those results. Planning
decisions for the management of these lands must be designed to: (1) create
jobs and income flow within the O&C Counties; (2) create opportunities for
growth in the timber and related industries; (3) provide a sustainable source
of revenues to O&C Counties based on the principles of sustained yield
timber production; (4) increased tax revenue to the State of Oregon; and (5)
contribute to the stability of communities in Western Oregon.
Fifty percent of the receipts from the sale of timber from the O&C lands are
distributed to the 18 O&C Counties in which the lands are located. That
50% is distributed to the Counties according to their proportion of the total
assessed value of the lands and timber that existed in each of the Counties in
1915. These percentages range from 0.36% to 25.05% for the 18 Counties. It
does not matter in which Counties the timber is harvested. All Counties get
their assigned percentages of whatever receipts are available each year. In
Douglas County, we receive about 25%.
The receipts are available to O&C Counties without restriction to be used
for essential services, including especially public safety programs such as
sheriff’s patrols and corrections, as well as health and social services,
libraries and programs for juveniles and seniors. These services have both a
direct and indirect effect on residents of my community.
Interview
Suzanne said that historically Douglas County has been one of the highest
recipients of payments to counties, making it more dependent and more
1552 | P a g e
Question
Discussion/Response
vulnerable.
Suzanne said the city did not benefit from the BLM’s recreational resources.
Major changes in forest policies occurred in 1995 and continue today that
significantly reduced BLM’s ability to manage the O&C and CBWR lands
for permanent timber production through sustained yield forestry.
Significant negative socio-economic impacts have occurred in the form of
job loss and increased unemployment; reduced income flow; business
closure and/or reduction in operations; and reduced County and community
services. In addition, significant increases have occurred in crime activities,
mental health and drug addiction issues, and other social impacts that have
affected the quality of life for residents living within communities.
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over time
affected your community?
In what ways?
Are there changes in the
ways that the BLM
manages its resources that
would increase your
community’s capacity and
resiliency?
The healthy functioning of O&C County governments and communities they
serve depends in substantial part on the BLM’s compliance with the O&C
Act. Changes in the way BLM manages O&C forests to comply with its
mandatory O&C statutory authority must be addressed in a land use
planning revision for O&C and CBWR lands. Simply stated, BLM plan
revisions must significantly identify the availability of more forestlands for
timber production that can be sold, cut and removed on a sustained yield
basis. This in turn will create sustainable economic growth in communities
by taking advantage of opportunities to create more jobs and increase
income flows; develop new businesses and revive old ones, and increase the
overall health and prosperity of communities. If, on the other hand, BLM
chooses to maintain the status quo or further reduce the availability of
timber that can be sold and harvested on a sustained yield basis,
communities will continue to decline from a socio-economic perspective.
Without major changes in the way BLM manages these lands, some O&C
Counties will become incapable of providing essential County services and,
therefore, cause communities residing within the O&C Counties to continue
to suffer and decline, which we have already recently experienced.
Interview
Drain currently only has logging rights on private lands, and the Mayor feels
that the area could significantly benefit from gaining access to logging on
Federal lands. There have been clashes between cities and
environmentalists, making it difficult for the cities to move forward in a way
that could be mutually beneficial. Cities are required to agree to numerous
environmental regulations, which the Mayor feels that Drain goes above and
beyond these regulations and is still experiencing push back from
environmentalist groups.
The Mayor points out that the BLM should have a leadership role in these
timber disputes and considers all possibilities and outcomes.
1553 | P a g e
City of Florence
Date: July 31, 2014
Participants:
Larry Patterson, City Manager Pro Tem; City of Florence
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-24. City of Florence interview
Question
Discussion/Response
Larry Patterson (Larry) moved to the State of Oregon in 1986 and served in
city administration in Bend and Oregon City, retiring in 2010. Larry
recently joined the City of Florence as an interim City Manager.
Florence is a coastal resort town with a large elderly population.
Recreational tourism is important to the City, with the coast, golf, fishing,
and a casino as major draws.
How do you view your
community’s ‘capacity,’
that is your community’s
ability to face changes,
respond to external and
internal stresses, create,
and take advantage of
opportunities, and meet its
needs?
How do you view your
community’s ‘resiliency,’
that is your community’s
ability to adapt to change
over time?
1554 | P a g e
Larry sees Florence’s capacity being challenged, as the city experiences a
weak overall economy and more and more costs forced upon it because of
declining intergovernmental fund transfers. The City had about a 16%
population increase between 2000 and 2012. The city’s 65 years and older
population (37%) is more than triple the share for the state of Oregon. Larry
sees this high retiree population as posing some limits to contributing to the
city’s capacity—indeed the city’s median household income is $35,000, at
the lower end of the cities that were interviewed. Larry pointed out retirees
with higher incomes (like in Bend, OR) have a greater positive fiscal impact
for a city.
The city’s hospital and ambulance services are important to the large elderly
population, and in tandem with these services is the higher demand for
public transportation. The city ambulance service is provided by a private
company, and supplemented with first responder service from the fire
department.
The Three Rivers Casino, owned and operated by the Siuslaw tribe of
Native Americans, is located just east of the city. Larry feels that spillover
spending in the city by casino guests is small though he thinks there are
opportunities for stronger, mutually beneficial connections between the city
and the casino. For example, he thinks both could benefit from more hotel
rooms.
The city’s traditional economy was based on timber and fishing. Both have
declined. Florence had an icehouse but it was moved down the coast to
Coos Bay (to a more direct location), and the city lost the jobs and
associated business activity.
The city has sought to adapt to changing circumstances by focusing on
tourism but tourism does not provide the stability of the traditional
industries. Tourism in Florence is very seasonal and though tourism
Question
Discussion/Response
provides a continuum of jobs, many are lower paying jobs.
Florence’s main draw is its location on the Oregon Coast, but it has limited
accessibility. It is on the Oregon Coast Highway (US Highway 101) but is
not close to I-5. Larry feels that the city needs a vision and plan to grow its
tourism industry. The city needs more hotel capacity and development of
the “shoulder” seasons (extending the visitor season later into the Fall and
Winter when the weather from time to time can be very pleasant).
Florence has far less resiliency compared to larger cities; larger cities can
recover more quickly from adversity.
There is a budget proposal for a local gas tax increase in Florence in an
effort to increase revenue for street improvements. Larry feels that, like all
money measures, passage of such a measure will always be a challenge. A
five-year moratorium imposed by the State legislature was recently lifted,
meaning local governments are now able to seek voter approval for such gas
tax increases.
Larry sees the direct day-to-day impact from the BLM as small. He did
point out that the BLM administers property with sand dunes on the north
side of town. The BLM’s lack of maintenance has meant that the city has
had to take responsibility for removing sand. Sand removal affects roads
and also affects local business such as Fred Meyer and the Sandpines Golf
Links.
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its capacity
and resiliency)?
In the bigger picture he thinks that the BLM’s management affects the
counties, and, in turn, the cities. As timber receipts have declined, jobs have
been lost and discretionary funds for cities, streets, social services watershed
enhancements along with other services have been cut.
Larry sees the cost of fighting forest fires are a significant issue for Western
Oregon. The costs are huge (one fire he cited cost $70 million) impacting
State budgets and subsequently impacting Counties and cities as resources
are directed away from other priorities. These cuts affect the entire State and
therefore affect cities like Florence.
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over
time affected your
community? In what
ways?
Are there changes in the
ways that the BLM
manages its resources that
would increase your
community’s capacity and
resiliency?
Larry does not have answers to how to manage the forest. However, he feels
strongly that a healthy forest industry is needed. The healthier the forest is
the greater its ability to bring about positive economic effects on
communities. An increase in the timber yield would benefit the local
communities like Florence as well as the counties.
1555 | P a g e
City of Grants Pass
Date: July 30, 2014
Participants:
Simon Hare, County Commissioner; Josephine County
Aaron Cubic, City Administrator: City of Grants Pass
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-25. City of Grants Pass interview
Question
Discussion/Response
Aaron Cubic (Aaron) has been with the city for two years having previously
served in Roseburg. Commissioner Hare (Simon) is a south Oregon native. He
lived elsewhere for around 10 years, including a stint with the Federal
government in Washington DC. He returned to Oregon and been a Josephine
County Commissioner since 2011.
How do you view
your community’s
‘capacity,’ that is
your community’s
ability to face
changes, respond to
external and internal
stresses, create, and
take advantage of
opportunities, and
meet its needs?
Aaron said that Grants Pass overall is doing relatively well based on several
measures of capacity (such as population growth, employment diversity, per
capita assessed property value). The city ranks high for livability. The city had a
50% population increase between 2000 and 2012. However, the poverty rate in
2012 was 21%.
Aaron said the city has been striving to retain existing businesses and maintain a
viable workforce, as it has navigated a shift from a timber and natural resourcebased economy to a more diversified economy. He said that tourism and
healthcare were important sectors of the local economy. The government sector
is also important since Grants Pass is the county seat. Aaron praised the
community college for doing a great job of matching people with the skills they
need to find work, especially former timber employees.
Simon added that he feels the city is at a “tipping” point with respect to
responding to the impacts and effects of the management of forest resources. As
an example he recounted that the last sawmill in Josephine County (Rough and
Ready) had to close in 2012 for lack of inventory. It had been in the county for
92 years and had provided 85 jobs, historically as high as 225. Fortunately, it is
expected to reopen with approximately 70 jobs in the near future. State funds
have helped the mill with retooling.
Recreation is important to the city and the county. The Rogue River is a
particularly important resource.
1556 | P a g e
Question
How do you view
your community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
ability to adapt to
change over time?
Discussion/Response
Grants Pass benefits from its relative size and capacity, but the city is highly
dependent on the county. Simon said the city and county were “tied at the hip.”
Aaron feels that as the rural area has struggled economically due to the decline
in the timber industry, the city has felt these effects both directly in strain on
city services (public safety and social services) and indirectly due to reduced
county funding.
As the county struggles to fund programs, the effects are felt by the city which
lacks the resources to make up shortfalls. Ballot measures that would increase
tax levies had majority support in the city, but failed overall due to insufficient
support in the rural areas.
Josephine County administers services that are important to the city including
juvenile services, the jail, the court system and district attorneys, and public
health. Aaron says the city has been hit harder than other areas with the
reduction of Secure Rural Schools (SRS) funding because of the decline in
county resources that are now passed down from the county.
Aaron and Simon said that the ways the BLM manages its timber resources
directly affect the city. The BLM administers approximately 300,000 acres land
in Josephine County, close to 30% of the county land area. This includes one of
the largest contiguous O&C land areas in Western Oregon along the Rogue
River in the northwest part of the County.
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity and
resiliency)?
If more Federal land were opened up for logging the timber industry would
benefit and result in more timber-related jobs with direct beneficial impacts to
the city, especially to former timber workers who are struggling to transition to
new employment.
Simon said that when there was more logging on Federal lands Josephine
county was receiving $10 to $12 million annually in shared timber receipts,
whereas payments under the SRS are currently approximately $5 million. Of
these monies, a good deal is spent on roads. Simon said the county spent $1.5
million helping to maintain roads needed to access Federal lands.
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over
time affected your
community? In what
ways?
Fire is a huge concern for Grants Pass. Large fires in 2013 (such as the 54,000acre Douglas Complex and Big Windy) effectively shut down the city causing
economic losses, heat, human health effects, and negative reputational impacts.
Reportedly, the Rogue River rafting companies lost $100,000 per day when
they were unable to operate. Simon estimated that 25% of the fires in Oregon
are in the BLM’s Medford District.
Simon acknowledges that there are no simple answers to the forestland
management questions. He served on Governor Kitzhaber’s O&C lands task
force and has some familiarity with the issues. He thinks that the management is
unbalanced; 300% of the Northwest Forest Plan’s conservation goals were
being achieved, but only 8% of the timber industry’s goals. He is looking to the
new round of RMP’s for more balance.
Are there changes in
the ways that the
In Simon’s view, if plans are written solely from the perspective of ecology,
they will not be effective; ecological set-asides with no management will lead to
1557 | P a g e
Question
BLM manages its
resources that would
increase your
community’s capacity
and resiliency?
Discussion/Response
more fires. He is interested in water quality, but not just for its own sake; the
Rogue River, for example, supports a $15 million economy based on fishing
(salmon, steelhead) and other recreation (Josephine County Parks Dept. Study).
Simon reiterated his feeling that Grants Pass/Josephine County are at a tipping
point with respect to their resiliency. Absent change, the communities’ inability
to deliver services will create a failed situation that will affect their reputation
and send them into an economic spiral they will have great difficulty recovering
from. The county’s tax rate (58 cents per $1,000 of assessed value) is the lowest
in the State of Oregon. O&C Payments as proportion of the county budget is
13% (only in Douglas County is the share higher). Simon acknowledged that
the property tax rate is low but added that this low number should not be taken
out of context because other taxes and fees make up the total tax burden.
There is strong community support for putting more forestland back into
production and for clearing the dead/dying timber. Simon serves on the
Interagency Salvage Committee. What, he asks, are they going to do with the
75,000 acres that burnt in the fire? He finds it very frustrating that a new plan
has to be prepared after each fire. There should be an overall plan that is
mutually agreed upon under which actions can be taken without unnecessary
“reinventing the wheel.”
Simon feels that in the past when there were more people (including loggers) in
the forest and the roads were more actively managed, these people in a sense
were the first responders and were able to provide faster response times to
emergencies. Now he sees fires escalating more rapidly as first responders are
faced with overgrowth and blocked access roads.
1558 | P a g e
City of Klamath Falls
Date: July 23, 2014
Participants:
Nathan Cherpeski, City Manager; City of Klamath Falls
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-26. City of Klamath Falls interview
Question
Discussion/Response
Nathan feels that Klamath Falls is challenged in terms of capacity. Traditionally
the city was a natural resource-heavy, resource dependent community, with lots
of lumber mills. Workers were able to get decent, well-paying jobs without
having, necessarily, a high level of education. With the decline in the timber
industry, much of the supporting timber infrastructure has disappeared and the
city has struggled.
How do you view your
community’s
‘capacity,’ that is your
community’s ability to
face changes, respond
to external and internal
stresses, create, and
take advantage of
opportunities, and
meet its needs?
Today the census data indicate the challenges: poverty rate of 24% (compared
to 15% for Oregon); high number of lower paying jobs, relatively low rate of
homeownership (42%), only 8% of jobs in manufacturing, unemployment rate
of 10–12% (Bureau of Labor Statistics Klamath county data for June 2013–May
2014). Nathan cites as factors the loss of resource-based jobs and an influx of
lower income retirees. While the population of the city is approximately 21,000,
the area population is around 40,000.
The city is surrounded by forest and recreation land. The city is the closest
community to Crater Lake National Park, making it a destination. Klamath
County has the highest per capita amount of outdoor recreation land (34,300
acres) compared to the other counties in the capacity/resiliency assessment.
Tourism is important to the economy, but jobs in the tourism sector do not pay
as well as those in manufacturing.
The city’s interior location off the interstate highway grid makes it hard to
attract new industries. The city’s largest job sectors are Health Care and Social
Assistance, Education, and Retail. Oregon Institute of Technology, the only
public institute of technology in the Northwest U.S., is a strong city asset.
Nathan says that the city is still a timber town at heart – the wild west. Opinions
vary; some residents look back fondly at the older timber-dependent economy
and yearn for a return. Others see the need to forge a new path.
How do you view your
community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
ability to adapt to
change over time?
Nathan points out that the city is seeking to adapt from its former timber-reliant
economy to a more diversified economy, but the challenges make this difficult.
In that sense, the city has not turned around. He feels that some of the city’s
adaptation efforts have been stymied by an environmental interests/interest
groups who are not from the area and do not have to live with the consequences
of failed economic initiatives. Nathan gave as an example, a private developers
interests/efforts to develop a ski resort (following the example of Bend) – which
failed due to red tape and environmental concerns.
1559 | P a g e
Question
Discussion/Response
Nathan questions whether the city is being given the tools (or conversely is
being denied the tools) to be resilient and allow it to adapt.
The types of jobs that are interested in coming to the city are lower paying jobs
such as call centers. Nathan spoke about the significant loss that the community
felt about the Jeld-Wen’s decision to move its corporate, global headquarters
from Klamath Falls to Charlotte, North Carolina. Jen-Weld, windows and doors
manufacturer, was Oregon’s largest private company. As a result,
manufacturing jobs remained while corporate executive jobs were lost.
As another example, Nathan cited Collins, a wood products company, where
employment at its Klamath plant was once as high as 1,200 but has fallen to
300.
Industry consolidations have left the city with old mill redevelopment sites.
While Nathan did not single out the BLM, he felt that its decisions are part of a
larger decision-making environment that has resulted in the city’s loss of
capacity. The rules and regulations, which are formulated in metropolitan areas,
have hurt and continue to hurt small rural cities.
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity and
resiliency)?
The overall result is pressure on the city’s resources and strain on the social
safety network.
The BLM and the U.S. Forest Service manage some of the access roads around
Klamath Falls that connect residents and tourists with forestlands and natural
areas. There is strong support among residents for more access to public lands
(off-road vehicles) to allow the public to use the resources.
BLM’s management of other resources such as minerals have a minimal effect
on Klamath Falls.
Have changes in the
BLM’s
resource management
over time affected
your community? In
what ways?
Are there changes in
the ways that the BLM
manages its resources
that would increase
your community’s
capacity and
resiliency?
1560 | P a g e
Nathan believes the supply should be increased – allowing a “reasonable”
amount of logging. His view is that as the timber harvest continues to decline,
trees tend to be smaller and grow closer together, dying in the forest as opposed
to being harvested. This results in unhealthy forest land which is prime tinder
for forest fires, which the area experiences on an annual basis. Nathan cited the
Moccasin Hill Fire as a recentJuly 2014) example.
Nathan sees the importance for the BLM to manage the city’s public lands for
more than only recreation and to provide more resource products.
These changes would positively impact Klamath Falls and increase its capacity
and resiliency
City of Junction City
Date: August 14, 2014
Participants:
Jason Knope, Public Works Director; City of Junction City
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-27. Junction City interview
Question
Discussion/Response
Jason Knope (Jason) is a lifelong Oregonian. He thinks that Junction city’s
capacity is fairly high which he attributes in part to strong community
engagement that has broadened the city’s ability to meet its needs and face
change.
How do you view your
community’s
‘capacity,’ that is your
community’s ability to
face changes, respond
to external and internal
stresses, create, and
take advantage of
opportunities, and
meet its needs?
Junction City is located approximately 15 miles northwest of Eugene and is
surrounded by agricultural land in the Willamette River valley. The city benefits
from its proximity to both rural and urban environments and opportunities. The
city had a 15% population increase between 2000 and 2012.
The city has a strong manufacturing economic sector comprising approximately
3,000 jobs, 25% of the jobs in a five mile radius (the largest in number of any of
the cities in the sample— and Jason thinks the number may be closer to 35%).
Historically this was due in part to the city housing the Country Coach
Recreational Vehicle manufacturing plant. At its height, the company had
between 500 and 600 employees. It went bankrupt in November 2009, but has
recently reopened under the same name, though now with approximately 100
employees focusing on refurbishing and modernizing RV interiors.
Jason said that the economy in Junction City is fairly diverse, though it has little
today in the way of timber-related industries. He estimates that about 5% of the
city’s workforce is directly related to the timber industry, or indirectly in a
support capacity.
How do you view your
community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
ability to adapt to
change over time?
Jason added that some of the city’s labor force work in Eugene. There is a small
tourism and visitation economic component, Junction City being in Oregon
wine country—the city is gateway to the Long Tom agri-tourism trail.
The city’s traditional economy was based on timber and farming, but as noted
above is now quite diverse. Jason feels the city has done a good job in
diversifying after the decline of the timber industry. He attributes this in part to
geography and locational opportunities (the city is located on Oregon Route 99
truck route) but also, in his opinion, to unusually strong community engagement
and involvement that has led to development of a strong community vision. For
example, Jason points out that the city currently has three different committees
dealing with community development, looking at the potential ripple effects of
different community development options in different locations in relation to
the vision for the city’s future. These committees engage in “what ifs” – helping
the city decide its investment and development policy.
1561 | P a g e
Question
Discussion/Response
Agriculture in the area has also changed. Agriculture has always been an
integral part of Junction City’s economic landscape, but Jason explains that
there has been a shift from the traditional grass, hay and seed crops to organic
crops; wheat and barley, and to biofuels. He estimates this sector now makes up
between 40% and 50% of agricultural production.
Jason believes the city learnt lessons through its experience with Country
Coach, primarily to push to broaden its horizons. It expanded its Urban Growth
Boundary, examined its fees and rates schedules to ensure the city was
attractive to development, invested in infrastructure, engaged the community,
explored development scenarios, and looked for opportunities to diversify. This
included a prison, which did not move forward, and a new psychiatric hospital,
part of the Oregon State Hospital system, which is scheduled to open in 2015.
Jason feels the direct day-to-day impact from the BLM on Junction City is
relatively small. The city has moved on compared to 10–15 years ago when it
was more timber-dependent.
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity and
resiliency)?
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over time
affected your
community? In what
ways?
Are there changes in
the ways that the BLM
manages its resources
that would increase
your community’s
capacity and
resiliency?
1562 | P a g e
He thinks there are two or three lumber mills outside town, inside the Urban
Growth Boundary - Seneca Sawmill, Lane Forest Products, and Weyerhaeuser and perhaps one mill in town, a processing packing business that relocated from
Eugene. However, as noted above, overall employment in timber industries is
small.
In the bigger picture, he thinks that the BLM’s management affects the counties,
and, in turn, the cities. Specifically, as timber receipts have declined,
discretionary funds have been cut. Jason explains that until 2008 Junction City
was receiving between $60,000 and $65,000 a year in timber receipts funds
from Lane County for the city’s street fund. This was the second largest source
of funding after gas tax receipts (approximately $300,000). The city no longer
receives these monies, which is regrettable as the city was using them for
pedestrian-related projects.
Jason believes that an increase in timber production would have a positive effect
on Junction City. Over time, the timber-related industries have shrunk to some
degree, though he notes that they have not gone away entirely. More timber
opportunities would certainly provide the community with more options and he
sees a more reliable timber resource as a benefit to the area overall.
City of Lincoln City
Date: July 11, 2014
Participants:
David Hawker, City Manager; Lincoln City
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-28. Lincoln City interview
Question
Discussion/Response
Lincoln City has an interesting capacity mix. The assessed value of property in
the city is high but residents’ incomes are low. This is due to the nature of the
city as a vacation and second home destination on the Oregon Coast. Roughly, a
third of the housing stock in the city is second homes, owned mostly by
residents of Portland and Salem. It is the premiere beach town destination
within driving distance of these larger municipalities.
How do you view your
community’s
‘capacity,’ that is your
community’s ability to
face changes, respond
to external and internal
stresses, create, and
take advantage of
opportunities, and
meet its needs?
Lincoln City serves a variety of residential and visitor markets. The city has a
large number of short-term rental units (hotel, motel vacation rental dwellings);
about 4,000. This helps make it a fairly inexpensive place to visit. A variety of
well-priced long-term rentals are also available. With its low cost of living, it
also attracts retirees. This variety provides a high flux of visitors and seasonal
residents over the course of the year, and the city accommodates and benefits
from this variety.
The city is home to a retail outlets mall and the Chinook Winds Casino,
operated by the Confederated Tribes of the Siletz.
Low resident incomes are due to the concentration of employment in retail,
accommodation, and food service jobs. This includes seasonal employment.
David feels that Lincoln City has high capacity because its economic diversity
makes is less sensitive to economic ups and downs. Low resident income is a
concern but is offset to some degree by the property tax base and visitor
spending.
How do you view your
community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
ability to adapt to
change over time?
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity and
resiliency)?
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
Resiliency was to some extent thrust on the city. During the 1960s, partially as a
result of the Clean Water Act, three cities and three unincorporated areas
became incorporated as the City of Lincoln City. This created rational,
consolidated boundaries for efficient delivery of city services.
The BLM has very little direct effect on the city. Approximately 60% of
Lincoln City’s watershed is in Federal ownership, but the BLM owns very little
compared to the USFS. Water quality could be a major concern, but the decline
in logging since the 1990s on all Federal lands has meant that potentially
impactful logging practices have not occurred.
Recreation is a major component of Federal land management in the area. What
drives tourism in Lincoln City is the beach but, increasingly, opportunities to
1563 | P a g e
Question
management over time
affected your
community? In what
ways?
Discussion/Response
experience the spectacular landscape and natural areas by hiking, trails, and
scenic viewing, hunting and fishing. For example, the U.S. Forest Service
maintains the Cascade Head National Scenic Research Area in the Siuslaw
National Forest, which has congressional legislative limits for activities. While
logging on private lands occurs, David was not aware of Federal timber sales.
Are there changes in
the ways that the BLM
manages its resources
that would increase
your community’s
capacity and
resiliency?
Whatever the BLM can do to maintain and increase access to this landscape for
recreation would benefit Lincoln City. David speculated that if land swaps
between the BLM and the USFS could be affected, this could provide
opportunities for better management.
1564 | P a g e
The city does not benefit directly from timber payments to counties. David
thought that payments to Lincoln County were earmarked for social services, so
increases in payments could have an indirect beneficial effect on city residents.
City of Molalla
The City of Molalla was unavailable for an interview. However, Molalla City Manager, Dan Huff,
provided written responses to the questions. These are provided verbatim below, followed by some
additional observations by ERM.
Table P-29. City of Molalla interview
Question
Discussion/ Response
Dan Huff written response
How do you view your
community’s
‘capacity,’ that is your
community's ability to
face changes, respond
to external and internal
stresses, create, and
take advantage of
opportunities, and
meet its needs?
How do you view your
community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
ability to adapt to
change over time?
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity
and resiliency)?
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
Today, Molalla is in a fairly strong position to react to change and respond to
opportunities. Molalla never really grew up when the mills closed in the 1980s
due to a large influx of residents that were commuting to Portland and Salem
area employment. Because of that change, the city did not have to face that
changing economy until the late 2007–2012. Today our capacity and
infrastructure is managed for growth and expansion, capitalizing on the
recreation and agriculture in the region.
Additional observations
The city benefits from its proximity to both Portland and Salem, which are
about 30 and 40 miles away, respectively.
Molalla has experienced a significant population increase (42%) between 2000
and 2012. At just over 8,000 residents, the city has a relatively low percentage
of its population below the poverty level (11%) compared to the State
percentage (15%).
Molalla is the gateway to the Molalla River Recreation Corridor, attracting
visitors year-round for sightseeing, fishing, hunting, water sports, camping,
mountain biking, and horseback riding.
Written response
Molalla is a tough town and people choose to live here today. The economic
and fiscal storms have not changed the longtime resident’s belief in their
community as a great place to live or come home to. Molalla has adapted and
accepted that part of its role is as a commuter city but with a vibrant past that is
connected to timber.
Written response
BLM’s management of resources in the Molalla River corridor have not
impacted the recreation component of this area recently. We do have some
timber related jobs but there is not much timber-related activity in town today.
Four in-town mills have closed since the mid-eighties and periphery businesses
like saw shops, and equipment dealers go with the mills. There are two mills
north of town, and the former in-town mills are redevelopment sites today. The
old sites are now being looked at for redevelopment - one redevelopment area at
the south end of town is now a bark and chip mobile unit.
Written response
1565 | P a g e
Question
management over time
affected your
community? In what
ways?
Discussion/ Response
Resource management has removed the historic job market from the area.
However, Molalla continues to pursue other opportunities as a bedroom
community to Salem and Portland. Because the farm or mill to market
transportation corridors are not as high volume with trucks highway
maintenance dollars have decreased in the area over the years at the State level.
Are there changes in
the ways that the BLM
manages its resources
that would increase
your community’s
capacity and
resiliency?
At this point probably not. Other than promotion of recreation, I am not sure
how resource management would greatly impact the community today.
1566 | P a g e
City of Rogue River
Date: July 22, 2014
Participants:
Pam VanArsdale, Mayor; City of Rogue River
Mark Reagles, City Administrator: City of Rogue River
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-30. City of Rogue River interview
Question
Discussion/Response
Mark has been with city for 20 years. He is a 4th generation Oregonian. Both he
and his father worked in the timber industry and lost their jobs (Roseburg
Lumber). He said that the City of Rogue River’s capacity is closely tied to the
timber industry. As the fortunes of the timber industry have ebbed and flowed,
so have the city’s fortunes – wreaking havoc with its economy and capacity.
How do you view your
community’s
‘capacity,’ that is your
community’s ability to
face changes, respond
to external and internal
stresses, create, and
take advantage of
opportunities, and
meet its needs?
Before the 1970s, Rogue River had more than one mill. The city’s one
remaining mill (owned by Medford Corp) burned to the ground in 1990. It was
rebuilt then sold, and resold, closing for long periods during transitions. The
mill, located by I-5, is now owned by Murphy Plywood. It employs
approximately 150 people – and is the largest employer, and taxpayer in the
city. Murphy plans to add another shift, which could increase the number of
jobs to about 250. Mark pointed out that timber-related employment is more
widespread including truck drivers, loggers, construction workers, and
machinists. The Rogue River School District is the second largest employer.
The city lost over 400 residents (18%) between 2000 and 2012 and has an 18%
poverty rate. Mark said that the city has seen an increase in retirement-aged
residents and a decline in the school-aged population, to the point where one of
the city’s four schools had to close. In the late 1980s and 1990s retirees were
coming from California; people interested in enjoying Oregon’s great quality of
life.
Mayor VanArsdale (Pam) said that the city has seen a shift to service and retail
jobs, but these jobs tend to be low wage compared to the higher, familysupporting wage jobs in the timber industry.
How do you view your
community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
ability to adapt to
Recreational tourism is a small portion of the city’s economy. While the Rogue
River is well known for rafting, that activity takes place upstream of the city. In
2009, the Savage Rapids (irrigation) Dam between Grants Pass and Rogue
River was removed. While this benefitted fishes and fishing in the Rogue River,
the city lost the lake behind the dam, which was used for boating. The city
considered it a loss –the city gets little economic benefit from fishing.
Rogue River has struggled to adapt from a timber-reliant economy to a more
diversified economy. The lack of diversity makes the city less resilient. Mark
pointed out that because the city is small the ebbs and flows in timber-related
employment have major direct and ripple impacts on the community. Rogue
River cannot compete with the larger cities.
1567 | P a g e
Question
change over time?
Discussion/Response
For example, he noted that during the 2007–2009 recession, the mill’s assessed
value fell from $13 million to $3 million—with severe effects on city tax
revenues.
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity and
resiliency)?
The city’s loss of population is an indication of the city’s resiliency challenges.
Mark feels that the way the BLM manages its timber resources directly affects
the City. If more Federal land were opened up for logging the timber industry
would benefit and result in more timber-related jobs with direct beneficial
impacts to the City. With a stronger timber industry, more stable jobs could be
offered and more people would set up roots in the community. This would result
in more school-aged children being added to the school system, creating the
need for hiring more education jobs.
In places where the BLM has cut roads into the forestlands and properly
managed these roads, it is easier for emergency vehicles to access particularly in
the case of a forest fire.
The BLM management of recreation resources has limited effects on the City.
However, Mark did note that the BLM is working with a local group to open up
an area for mountain biking approximately two miles from the City on the
Rogue River Greenway, a 30-mile partially complete greenway between the
Cities of Grants Pass and Central Point.
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over time
affected your
community? In what
ways?
Are there changes in
the ways that the BLM
manages its resources
that would increase
your community’s
capacity and
resiliency?
1568 | P a g e
In Mark’s and the Mayor’s view, the BLM should actively “manage” its lands
and “use” the resource. Enough land has been preserved and timber should be
cut which would have multiple benefits: economic (as described above); help
manage the risk of fire, and, as a side benefit open up areas for hunting – for
food and for recreation. Mark said he is a hunter and hunts on private and public
land – he finds the hunting is better on private lands that are managed.
Mayor VanArsdale felt that the forestland can be managed to meet both the
environmental interests and economic interests, which will make for a more
well-rounded economy.
Mark feels that the BLM should allow more timber sales and boost the supply.
He thinks the decline of timber is a supply issue – not an issue of jobs moving
overseas.
City of St. Helens
Date: August 26, 2014
Participants:
John Walsh, City Administrator; City of St. Helens
Susan Conn, City Councilor; City of St. Helens
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-31. City of St. Helens interview.
Question
Discussion/ Response
John Walsh has served as City Administrator for St. Helens since 2012. Susan
Conn has served as a City Councilor since 2012, and is a long-time resident.
John had previously worked in Coos County and is familiar with timber issues.
John noted that the city’s capacity numbers look good with high population
growth, a high working-age population cohort, and high median household
income. However, he said that the numbers don’t tell the whole story.
How do you view
your community’s
‘capacity,’ that is your
community’s ability to
face changes, respond
to external and
internal stresses,
create, and take
advantage of
opportunities, and
meet its needs?
John and Susan said that historically the city was a mill town and had several
mills but the city has experienced a steady drop-off in timber-related
employment in recent decades culminating in the closure of a Boise Paper plant
in 2012; the plant had been winding down over time, but all told, the job losses
totaled approximately 900. John said this was a devastating social blow for the
city. The one remaining mill is the Cascade Tissue plant, which has
approximately 60 jobs—a huge change for the city.
John described St. Helens as a healthy, middle-class town, but essentially a
bedroom community for Portland and Hillsboro, both approximately 30 miles
away. Hillsboro is the location of one of Intel’s product development and
manufacturing campuses, and is the largest private employer in the State. John
estimated that about three-quarters of St. Helens’ residents commute out of the
city to work. John and Susan said that while the city is fortunate to have this
proximity to jobs, the jobs are not “in the city” and the result has been a loss of
social cohesion. As examples, John cited the decline in participation in
charitable organizations and social clubs such as the Kiwanis. Susan noted that
three bookstores, including her own, had closed.
St. Helens is the county seat of Columbia County and public administration is
one of the larger job sectors (11%).
How do you view
your community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
ability to adapt to
change over time?
St. Helens owns a 2,500-acre tree farm which it harvests for sale; no old growth.
John noted that change has been thrust on the city. The mills had provided
commercial tax base and had supported the public utilities. With the mills’
decline and the city’s loss of income and inability to raise revenue due to tax
caps, the city has had to enact double-digit rate utility increases over the past
five years and has reduced its workforce by 30%. He noted that the tax rate,
$1.90 per $1,000, is unchanged since 1995. As a result, revenues only increase if
1569 | P a g e
Question
Discussion/ Response
the assessed value goes up, but this too is capped.
John said that the State has been doing a good job of retraining the workforce as
fewer Oregonians are employed in the timber industry. Susan said that older
generations have been especially affected by changes in the economic landscape
in St. Helens.
John said that the city is fortunate in that residents have alternative job options
in Portland and Hillsboro. He thought that total employment was back to prerecession levels, but not the same jobs.
The city is working to adapt to the new economic environment. John said that
the large mills were located along the Columbia River waterfront, which limited
public access to this area. The city is working with Boise in order to acquire
those properties and transition to new uses. The planning effort includes design
collaborations between the city, Portland State University, and the American
Institute of Architects.
However, both he and Susan acknowledged that lack of a bridge over the
Columbia river to I-5 is a major impediment to the city’s economic
development.
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity and
resiliency)?
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over
time affected your
community? In what
ways?
Are there changes in
the ways that the
BLM manages its
resources that would
increase your
community’s capacity
and resiliency?
1570 | P a g e
John felt that generally cities had more resiliency compared to counties because
the counties were tasked with more services and the cities had more options to
raise revenues.
There is relatively little BLM land near St. Helens, compared to many of the
other cities in the sample, but the city is affected by the way the BLM manages
its resources in that the county has cut services. Susan noted that the county got
close to closing the jail in the city.
John said that the city had never received pass-through Federal timber funds
from Columbia County, and so had not relied on such funds.
John sees a sustainable timber harvest as the key to increasing community
capacity and resiliency. He did not think the entire decline of the timber industry
was attributable to the BLM; there were many other factors to consider. He
noted that St. Helens had not been affected by the forest fires that had affected
other parts of the State.
City of Sublimity
Date: July 28, 2014
Participants:
Sam Brentano, County Commissioner; Marion County Board of Commissioners, former Mayor of
Sublimity
Hitesh Parekh, Management Analyst; Marion County
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-32. City of Sublimity interview
Question
Discussion/Response
Commissioner Brentano (Sam) is a former Mayor of Sublimity (1983–1993) and
understands its unique needs and challenges. He recalls that Sublimity was
formerly an almost entirely agricultural- and timber-based economy, which has
shifted dramatically in recent decades as all the mills in Marion County have
closed. He recalled that in the 1970s and 1980s there were mills in many of the
nearby towns and many mill owners lived in Sublimity; at that time, he said, the
How do you view your
city had a high per capita income.
community’s
‘capacity,’ that is your
Today he described Sublimity as a healthy, middle-class town – but essentially a
community’s ability to
bedroom community for Salem. There is little or no involvement by the city’s
face changes, respond
residents in forest-related industries, whereas these used to be a key source of
to external and internal
economic vitality.
stresses, create, and
take advantage of
In spite of high household incomes (Sublimity’s was the highest among the
opportunities, and
cities interviewed) its tax base is too low to cover many necessary services. The
meet its needs?
city contracts with Marion County for public safety (Sheriff), and relies on the
county for many services including public safety, courts, and solid waste. The
county spends 80% of its general fund on these services.
How do you view your
community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
ability to adapt to
change over time?
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity and
resiliency)?
The city depends on the county for so many services that as the county’s ability
to provide services is strained, the city’s capacity is reduced.
The city has changed over time as described above. Sam said that Marion
County, by having less BLM acreage, is not as dependent as other O&C
Counties on timber.
The county payments (Secure Rural Schools and PILT) help, but they currently
total $5 to $6 million a year and make up a small share of the county budget.
Sam said that the BLM owns approximately 20,000 acres of land in Marion
County while the U.S. Forest Service owns 200,000 acres making the BLM’s
impact on the county lower than in other counties.
Sam’s concern is with the way the BLM (and other agencies) manages the
timber resources. In his view, it should be treated like a crop and managed to
help communities. This is not how the timberlands are currently being managed,
and as a result, they contribute little to the community’s capacity. In some
respects, lack of management is a drain on resources. For example, the county
has to spend timber dollars to pay for Sheriff’s deputies to patrol around the
1571 | P a g e
Question
Discussion/Response
forest. Sam thought there was more Federal patrol oversight in the past.
Sam also believes that the mismanagement contributes to the number and extent
of forest fires.
The BLM has some small recreation areas near Sublimity, which are used by
residents, namely the Elkhorn Valley Recreation Site (Little North Santiam
Recreation Area, Yellowbottom Recreation Site, and Fishermen’s Bend). These
are small and contribute little to overall community capacity.
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over time
affected your
community? In what
ways?
Are there changes in
the ways that the BLM
manages its resources
that would increase
your community’s
capacity and
resiliency?
1572 | P a g e
In Sam’s view, the key to increasing community capacity and resiliency is a
sustainable timber harvest. The lack of timber harvest has hurt communities by
reducing income and leaving a resource that is simply waiting to burn – this is
bad policy.
The market is there for Oregon. Canada stepped in and took market share as the
U.S. stopped producing.
City of Winston
Date: August 25, 2014
Participants:
Sharon Harrison, Mayor; City of Winston
Ken Harrison, former U.S. Forest Service employee
Kevin Miller, Superintendent; Winston-Dillard School District
David M. Van Dermark, City Manager; City of Winston
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Kristina Higgins, Intern; ERM
Table P-33. City of Winston interview
Question
Discussion/Response
Both Mr. (Ken) and Mayor (Sharon) Harrison are long-time residents of
Winston, having owned and operated the Harrison Hardware store for over 20
years prior to its sale in 2013. Ken is also a former timber industry employee; he
worked for the U.S. Forest Service as well as private timber companies that
worked with the BLM and the U.S. Forest Service.
How do you view your
community’s
‘capacity,’ that is your
community’s ability to
face changes, respond
to external and internal
stresses, create, and
take advantage of
opportunities, and
meet its needs?
The city’s population increased by 16% between 2000 and 2012 (from 4,613 to
5,352), but Winston’s poverty rate in 2012 was 30%, twice the rate for the State
as a whole.
Kevin said that Winston struggles with economic resources and is “living close
to the bone.” The city is becoming a retirement community. While retirees help
the city fiscally to some degree—paying property taxes, for example—they
don’t tend to spend much and as a result do not contribute to the local economy
as much as the family-wage jobs that used to be more prevalent. Kevin pointed
out that the nearest major medical center is in Roseburg (roughly 10 miles
north) where there is a VA hospital. Winston residents may spend their dollars
in Roseburg when attending medical appointments.
David says that the city is open to development and is very business-friendly. It
has capacity for growth and is ready to grow.
The Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians owns land near Winston in
the city’s growth area, but it has little impact on the city’s capacity. The Tribe
raises alfalfa and beef cattle. The Tribe owns a casino in Canyonville
approximately 25 miles south of Winston along Interstate 5.
1573 | P a g e
Question
How do you view your
community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
ability to adapt to
change over time?
Discussion/Response
Sharon says that Winston was and remains a timber-dependent community.
Roseburg Forest Products, which is in Dillard about 3 miles south of Winston,
employs 1,200–1,500 people at several mills. (This accounts for the high
number of jobs in the manufacturing sector in a 5-mile radius around the City in
the Census data). There were many layoffs there in 2008 but employment has
almost recovered. Kevin added that mechanization has affected employment. A
shift that used to require 100 people now needs only 30.
The city has struggled to adapt to a changing economy and demographics.
Kevin said that in 1980s the school district had some 2,000 children; today there
are approximately 1,400. There is a sense that the job growth is in Portland. The
Winston community today is very mobile and people move to the jobs.
The community has also lost truck farms. New businesses such as wineries have
opened but the wages, relatively speaking, are lower. Sharon feels the overall
income in Winston has been reduced.
Ken said that the BLM’s management practices affect the community greatly.
He said that recent policy is marked by lack of management. The only tree
cutting is thinning which leaves the old growth trees that can’t be touched due
to the Endangered Species Act. Winston and the surrounding Douglas County
have a huge forestland base – which is a renewable resource, unlike minerals,
which are a one-time extraction. However, unlike 20 years ago when the BLM
was more actively managing these lands and timber harvests were putting
dollars into the county budgets, today the city does not get the benefits it used
to.
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity and
resiliency)?
David points out that in the past the cities were given pass-through funds from
Secure Rural Schools to help manage their road maintenance. Winston received
$100,000 annually (a quarter of its $400,000/year road budget) until these funds
were stopped in 2010. The lack of O&C funds has resulted in raised costs to the
city, such as IT, jail beds, and radio communication.
He does not blame the BLM; rather he puts the blame on environmental
interests who file frequent lawsuits against the BLM. Kevin noted a recent
lawsuit regarding the Elliott State Forest. The forest is part of the Common
School Fund Lands to be managed for the benefit of the schools under the
Oregon Constitution. A portion of the forestland, under the instruction of the
State Land Board, is slated to be sold to a private entity, though environmental
groups have claimed that this sale should not be allowed to take place. The
Winston-Dillard School District has filed an amicus brief in support of the sale,
as this will result in a harvest and sales benefits for schools.
Kevin said that the BLM is decommissioning roads – creating a more natural
environment but limiting access to the forest. This is a serious problem with
respect to access for first responders in the event of a forest fire, preventing
access for emergency vehicles. In addition, this reduces forest access from a
recreation standpoint.
Kevin did wish to point to an alternative education program; a collaboration
with the BLM that teaches children about working in the forests and on stream
1574 | P a g e
Question
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over time
affected your
community? In what
ways?
Are there changes in
the ways that the BLM
manages its resources
that would increase
your community’s
capacity and
resiliency?
Discussion/Response
restoration. He sees this as a very beneficial program.
David feels that if the BLM should get back to timber harvest and land
management in the manner in which it did in the past. This would provide
revenues and reduce the incidence of large forest fires and other problems. In
his view, the BLM is not in compliance with the O&C Act - requiring that the
lands be managed to contribute to the economic stability of local communities
and industries.
He feels that there is worldwide market demand for timber products, as well as
a need to harvest the timber in an efficient and economically viable way.
Oregon produces Douglas-fir, a great tree for framing houses. As Oregon scaled
down its harvest, Canada has been increasing its timber exports and sends logs
to the U.S. to be milled.
1575 | P a g e
Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon
Date: July 8, 2014
Participants:
Heather Ulrich, District Archaeologist; Bureau of Land Management
Michael Wilson, Natural Resources Department Manager; Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde
Community of Oregon
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Table P-34. Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon interview
Question
Discussion/ Response
The word “community” needs to be understood broadly. It needs to consider the
greater membership of the Grand Ronde tribes, not just those living on the
reservation or in the tribally owned lands in the (unincorporated) town of Grand
Ronde. The tribes have 5,000–6,000 members spread out over the lands that
were ceded to the U.S. including, for example, in the BLM’s Roseburg and
Medford districts. Mike said he would look for membership data to supplement
the census data that is specific to tribally owned lands.
How do you view your
community’s
‘capacity,’ that is your
community’s ability to
face changes, respond
to external and internal
stresses, create and
take advantage of
opportunities, and
meet its needs?
The Grand Ronde’s capacity has increased over time, for example, since the
Northwest Forest Plan, but the Community still faces challenges in serving its
members and meeting its mission. There are more jobs today than back then but
this is not attributable to the BLM.
Funding for tribal functions comes from a variety of sources. Mike estimated
the income from timber sales at approximately $2 to $3 million a year. The
Tribes get the majority of their funds from the casino. The Tribe does not levy a
property tax. Mike said he would look into measures of community
income/wealth that might be comparable to, for example, the tax base of a city
or county, in order to help the BLM understand the Tribes’ financial capacity.
The Grand Ronde has taken on community building functions such as housing,
education, and health care. The State passed legislation allowing tribes to create
their own police departments. Grand Ronde has a police department in the town
of Grand Ronde (unincorporated), and has developed its own fire station. The
members living in this area wanted to make sure they had these services (where
county services were lacking).
The Tribes have established a “Spirit Mountain Community Fund” to support
members and projects throughout the Tribes’ geographical areas of interest. The
fund is supported by revenues from the casino. It has helped fund, for example,
a charter school and an environmental project on the Willamette River.
How do you view
your community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
ability to adapt to
change over time?
1576 | P a g e
The Tribes have shown their resiliency in the way they have diversified their
economy; the Spirit Mountain Casino, for example, being a major economic
driver. The diversification has helped the Tribe’s resilience.
During the recession, there was a significant drop in casino revenues.
Question
Discussion/ Response
Members have an interest in gathering plants when needed on BLM land,
hunting, and access to places of spiritual significance. Mike felt the BLM has
done a good job in meeting those needs and interests.
The way the BLM manages its timber resources affects the community. Many
tribal members live in timber-dependent communities. The Grand Ronde sells
timber from its reservation. The Tribes understand the need for mills, loggers,
and competition. The BLM can play a role in maintaining the industry.
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity and
resiliency)?
A healthy industry is important to support the services that are important to
tribal members such schools, police, fire, and roads.
As Mike talks to people in the timber industry, the importance of having a
predictable supply of raw material is very important. In addition, if the mills are
too far away the logs lack value; competition is important.
Mike said he would send the forest management plan (10-year plan) for the
Grand Ronde’s forest.
Mike did not see a direct correlation between the BLM’s resource management
and the casino revenues that are driven by broader economic trends.
There are management issues on the micro level. For example, there is about a
mile of boundary sharing on the eastern side of the Grand Ronde reservation,
where the tribes share a road with the BLM.
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over time
affected your
community? In what
ways?
Are there changes in
the ways that the BLM
manages its resources
that would increase
your community’s
capacity and
resiliency?
The lack of predictability in the timber market and sales has affected tribal
members in that timber supports the broader economy. If the broader economy
is doing well then the Tribes will benefit too.
The ways BLM manages cultural resources and natural resources/habitat affects
the community. The BLM could work with the Tribes to find the right balance
in protecting these resources, and provide more resource-based jobs to help
industry.
With respect to hunting, there is disappointment over declining opportunities to
hunt deer and elk - fewer openings and meadows due to lack of active
management, so the hunting areas for those species have declined. But Mike
thought this was more of a U.S. Forest Service issue than a BLM issue.
1577 | P a g e
Coquille Indian Tribe
Date: July 14, 2014
Participants:
Brenda Meade, Tribal Chairperson, Coquille Indian Tribe
George Smith, Executive Director, Coquille Indian Tribe
Mark Johnston, Deputy Executive Director, Coquille Indian Tribe
Clive Graham, Principal; ERM
Jill Bellenger, Associate Consultant; ERM
Heather Ulrich, District Archaeologist; Bureau of Land Management
Table P-35. Coquille Indian Tribe interview
Question
Discussion/Response
George gave a little background recent history about the Coquille Indian Tribe.
The Coquille Indian Tribe was terminated in 1954, but the United States
reinstituted Federal recognition to the Tribe and restored its full sovereignty
rights in 1989. Tribal membership is now approximately 1,000 across five
counties in southwest Oregon. The 297 number in the Census data only reflects
the population on the approximately 6,500 acres in the Census Bureau’s
boundary maps – mostly in the North Bend/Coos Bay area.
How do you view your
community’s
‘capacity,’ that is your
community’s ability to
face changes, respond
to external and internal
stresses, create, and
take advantage of
opportunities, and
meet its needs?
The 1954 termination “cut loose” the membership resulting in more assimilation
into local communities compared to reservations such as Warm Springs. This
means that the socioeconomic state of the Tribe is closely bound up with local
communities; the counties and cities, such as Coos Bay and North Bend. For
example, Coquille children attend community schools so when these schools are
affected by cutbacks, tribal children and families are equally affected.
Southwestern Oregon was historically heavily dependent on timber and fishing.
Coos Bay was an export center for the Oregon coast. Since the 1990s, there has
been an 80% reduction in timber sales. As a result, Coos County and the Coos
Bay area became economically stressed. The recession that began in 2007 was
one more blow and the area has not recovered.
Brenda added that the Tribe is currently facing the strain of responding to
increasing needs of the tribal membership; increased population and healthcare
costs. Census data indicate a tribal poverty rate of 23% compared to 15% for the
State as a whole.
The Coquille Indian Tribe is the second largest employer in Coos County,
making it a vital part of the wider economic landscape.
How do you view your
community’s
‘resiliency,’ that is
your community’s
1578 | P a g e
In summary, the Tribe has internal capacity and resources but is located in a
region of Oregon with macro level economic challenges that strain the Tribe’s
capacity to meet its needs.
The Tribe has shown its resiliency by its survival, resurgence, and recent
population growth. The Tribe has adapted and continues to adapt to economic
realities. The Mill Resort and Casino in Coos Bay is an important source of
income for the Tribe, but revenues were significantly affected by the recession,
Question
ability to adapt to
change over time?
Discussion/Response
and only now are they beginning to climb back to pre-recession numbers.
Overall, economic recovery in southwest Oregon has been much slower than in
the metropolitan parts of the State.
The Tribe is engaged in economic development initiatives through the Coquille
Economic Development Corporation. These include business ventures in
forestry, arts and exhibits, gaming and hospitality, assisted living and memory
care, high-speed telecommunications (Optical Rural Community Access
Communications) and renewable energy.
Because tribal and tribal members’ fortunes are closely tied to the local
communities, resiliency is also affected by the communities’ lack of resiliency.
For example, Brenda pointed out that in attempting to address budget
constraints, the Coos Bay School District went to a 4-day school week during
the 2013–14 school year. This type of action affects tribal members’ lives.
The timber industry is a major driver for Coos County and so that the way BLM
manages its resources has a great effect on the community.
How do the ways the
BLM manages its
resources affect your
community (its
capacity and
resiliency)?
The Tribe owns the Coquille Forest, comprised of 14 separate parcels of former
BLM timberlands in eastern Coos County, totaling approximately 5,410 acres.
The Tribe is legally mandated to manage the forest consistent with BLM’s
management practices. This places a financial management burden on the Tribe.
Bureau of Indian Affairs funding covers some the need, but the Tribe has to
supplement. The Tribe believes that the BLM’s practices are not all in the
Tribe’s economic interests. For example, George said that BLM’s practices
follow guidelines in the Northwest Forest Plan but that these guidelines go
beyond the requirements of the Endangered Species Act and NEPA. As a result,
the forests are becoming overgrown and are not being given the opportunity to
regenerate.
The Tribe is proud of its management practices. The Coquille Forest is Forest
Stewardship Council (FSC) certified.
The Tribe is very concerned about habitat, water resources, and water quality –
such as for salmon runs. George said that Tribal monitoring has been held up as
a national model.
Have changes in the
BLM’s resource
management over time
affected your
community? In what
ways?
Are there changes in
Mark said that BLM’s management of recreation resources had little effect on
the Tribe. He did note BLM’s role in helping manage the local Dunes National
Recreation Area at the mouth of the Umpqua River that attracted visitors and
some spinoff visitation to tribal facilities near Coos Bay.
Brenda feels that the Federal lands have not been managed well; very few jobs
are generated. George added that the biggest change in resource management
has been the decrease in the timber harvest. Practices have changed from
allowing sales, Survey and Manage, then to only allowing thinning – all
triggering lawsuits.
George feels that BLM’s forest management is driven more by risk aversion to
lawsuits than by its obligations to manage for sustained yield. As noted above,
he believes this has led the BLM to go over and above its obligations under the
1579 | P a g e
Question
the ways that the BLM
manages its resources
that would increase
your community’s
capacity and
resiliency?
Discussion/Response
ESA and NEPA. A more balanced, science driven approach would increase the
Allowable Sale Quantity (ASQ) which would result in higher timber sales and a
stronger local economy; which would help the Tribe. The timber capacity is
there; the forest is very productive.
Most of the Coquille land is in a trust from the Federal government, and the
Tribe has been constrained by economic stress from litigations in the timber
industry and increasing restrictions and requirements incurred by the BLM and
other agencies related to how the Tribe is required to manage its timber. The
way the BLM has been writing its management plans goes above and beyond,
as George points out, what is required for endangered species protection and
NEPA regulations.
The Tribe supports Federal legislation that would decouple management of the
Coquille Forest from BLM management.
Brenda added that the Tribe is very concerned about fire; she believes that
BLM’s management has been “cookie cutter” easy to administer but having
negative consequences such as allowing the buildup of material that is fuel for
fire.
Tribal lands are open to the public. The Tribe would like to work with the BLM
to allow it to erect fences and gates to protect access to certain areas.
1580 | P a g e
Issue 6
Would the alternatives result in environmental justice impacts (disproportionally high and adverse effects
on minority, low-income, or Tribal populations or communities)?
Minority Populations Meeting Environmental Justice
Criteria
Table P-36. Minority populations meeting environmental justice criteria
All Minorities
Total
Geography
Population
Number Percent
Oregon
3,836,628
563,921
15%
Benton County
Summit CDP
66
33
50%
Clackamas County
Barlow City
302
24
8%
Canby City
15,770
1,264
8%
Happy Valley City
14,050
3,900
28%
Johnson City
657
50
8%
Coos County
Glasgow CDP
1,057
232
22%
Powers City
890
179
20%
Jackson County
White City CDP
7,392
1,027
14%
Josephine County
Merlin CDP
1,484
353
24%
Selma CDP
579
56
10%
Klamath County
Bonanza Town
418
51
12%
Chiloquin City
766
603
79%
Malin City
712
156
22%
Merrill City
805
110
14%
Lincoln County
Lincoln Beach CDP
1,982
482
24%
Siletz City
1,400
441
32%
Linn County
Crabtree CDP
308
49
16%
Waterloo Town
320
35
11%
West Scio CDP
163
40
25%
Marion County
315,391
61,715
20%
Brooks CDP
665
173
26%
Four Corners CDP
16,472
4,555
28%
Gervais City
2,475
754
30%
Hayesville CDP
18,224
6,383
35%
Hubbard City
3,154
920
29%
Keizer City
36,402
4,673
13%
Labish Village CDP
195
113
58%
Mount Angel City
3,347
603
18%
Salem City (1)
154,835
28,403
18%
Hispanic
Number Percent
449,888
12%
0
0%
87
3,735
697
244
29%
24%
5%
37%
14
83
1%
9%
2,301
31%
65
117
4%
20%
76
44
555
416
18%
6%
78%
52%
358
42
18%
3%
66
73
21
76,429
88
6,360
1,700
6,891
1,221
7,015
128
953
30,565
21%
23%
13%
24%
13%
39%
69%
38%
39%
19%
66%
28%
20%
1581 | P a g e
Geography
St. Paul City
Stayton City
Woodburn City
Multnomah County
Fairview City
Gresham City
Maywood Park City
Portland City
Wood Village City
Polk County
Independence City
Tillamook County
Bayside Gardens CDP
Washington County
Aloha CDP
Beaverton City
Bethany CDP
Bull Mountain CDP
Cedar Hills CDP
Cedar Mill CDP (1)
Cornelius City
Forest Grove City
Hillsboro City
Oak Hills CDP
Rockcreek CDP
Tualatin City (1)
Yamhill County
Dayton City
Grand Ronde CDP (1)
Lafayette City
McMinnville City
Sheridan City
Tribes
Coos, Lower Umpqua, and
Siuslaw Reservation and OffReservation Trust Land, OR
Coquille Reservation and OffReservation Trust Land, OR (2)
Grand Ronde Community and
Off-Reservation Trust Land, OR
Klamath Reservation, OR
Siletz Reservation and OffReservation Trust Land, OR
Warm Springs Reservation and
Off-Reservation Trust Land, OR
Total
Population
310
7,637
23,879
737,110
8,884
105,612
1,008
585,888
3,870
All Minorities
Number Percent
31
10%
1,234
16%
9,067
38%
158,601
22%
1,807
20%
20,891
20%
226
22%
131,729
22%
644
17%
Hispanic
Number Percent
73
24%
1,535
20%
13,444
56%
79,791
11%
1,268
14%
21,074
20%
4
0%
54,420
9%
1,160
30%
8,535
1,724
20%
3,271
38%
804
531,818
50,710
90,254
20,505
8,990
9,273
15,118
11,867
21,245
91,998
11,005
9,488
26,106
156
122,803
15,057
25,072
7,914
1,847
1,919
2,919
4,039
3,609
26,243
3,065
1,888
3,814
19%
23%
30%
28%
39%
21%
21%
19%
34%
17%
29%
28%
20%
15%
0
83,085
10,664
14,310
960
224
1,205
529
5,916
5,338
22,885
418
572
4,852
0%
16%
21%
16%
5%
2%
13%
3%
50%
25%
25%
4%
6%
19%
2,537
1,451
3,709
32,092
6,086
820
677
445
5,672
966
32%
47%
12%
18%
16%
1,021
115
904
6,324
974
40%
8%
24%
20%
16%
24
12
50%
0
0%
297
166
56%
15
5%
473
381
81%
7
1%
17
11
65%
0
0%
476
420
88%
19
4%
3,960
3,657
92%
372
9%
Notes: Geographies meeting the 50 percent criterion shown in gray with black border; Geographies meeting the meaningfully
greater criterion shown in gray
1582 | P a g e
(1) Where a city or Census Designated Place (CDP) spans more than one county, the BLM assigned it to the county with largest
share of population.
(2) Shows 2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Data since 2012 data not available
Sources:
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04,
DP05, S1901 and S1701; American FactFinder; http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04,
DP05, S1901 and S1701; American FactFinder; http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04,
DP05, S1901 and S1701; American FactFinder; http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2010 Census Restricting Data, Table DP05; American FactFinder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04,
DP05, S1901 and S1701; American FactFinder; http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
Low-income Populations Meeting Environmental Justice
Criteria
1583 | P a g e
Table P-37. Low-income populations meeting environmental justice criteria
Geography
Oregon
Benton County
Alpine CDP
Alsea CDP
Corvallis City
Monroe City
Clackamas County
Estacada City
Government Camp CDP
Johnson City
Clatsop County
Astoria City
Cannon Beach City
Warrenton City
Westport CDP
Columbia County
Clatskanie City
Deer Island CDP
Prescott City
Coos County
Bandon City
Barview CDP
Bunker Hill CDP
Coos Bay City
Lakeside City
Myrtle Point City
Powers City
Curry County
Gold Beach City
Harbor CDP
Langlois CDP
Nesika Beach CDP
Port Orford City
Douglas County
Gardiner CDP
Glendale City
Glide CDP
Lookingglass CDP
1584 | P a g e
Type
County
CDP
CDP
City
City
County
City
CDP
City
County
City
City
City
CDP
County
City
CDP
City
County
City
CDP
CDP
City
City
City
City
County
City
CDP
CDP
CDP
City
County
CDP
City
CDP
CPD
Total
Population
3,836,628
85,501
114
126
54,341
635
377,206
377,206
131
657
37,068
9,510
1,373
4,991
483
49,317
1,788
269
34
62,937
3,053
1,832
1,892
15,938
1,444
2,496
890
22,344
2,563
2,098
218
352
1,198
107,391
94
854
1,867
1,227
Poverty Population
(Shaded Cells are ≥ 25% of
State Percentage)
Number
Percent
584,059
15%
17,418
20%
37
32%
22
17%
14,355
26%
73
11%
36,265
10%
674
25%
4
3%
176
27%
5,725
15%
1,896
20%
344
25%
811
16%
56
12%
6,797
14%
391
22%
57
21%
5
15%
10,661
17%
443
15%
803
44%
396
21%
2,899
18%
230
16%
635
25%
192
22%
3,048
14%
370
14%
384
18%
76
35%
40
11%
328
27%
18,777
17%
25
27%
243
28%
466
25%
371
30%
Total
Households
Median
Household
Income
1,512,718
33,502
45
52
21,391
243
145,004
1,071
64
295
15,757
4,171
650
2,047
227
19,060
723
140
19
26,567
1,684
752
573
6,659
675
1,007
313
10,320
1,029
1,251
92
200
568
43,678
45
323
698
424
$50,036
$48,635
$19,750
$33,654
$37,793
$36,328
$63,951
$39,844
$250,000
$33,456
$44,330
$40,603
$39,559
$35,325
$26,435
$55,358
$35,875
$48,182
$23,750
$37,853
$34,279
$20,133
$21,305
$38,820
$36,779
$29,702
$28,750
$38,401
$50,958
$26,629
$33,906
$26,813
$30,667
$40,096
$85,625
$34,226
$49,940
$41,802
Low-Income Households
(Shaded Cells are ≥ 25%
of State Percentage)
Number
Percent
366,078
24%
9,716
29%
24
53%
20
39%
7,765
36%
78
32%
24,506
17%
380
36%
29
45%
120
41%
4,286
27%
1,360
33%
222
34%
643
31%
98
43%
4,289
23%
257
36%
53
38%
12
63%
8,581
32%
635
38%
456
61%
319
56%
2,224
33%
213
32%
391
39%
146
47%
3,488
34%
330
32%
589
47%
28
31%
71
36%
238
42%
12,667
29%
9
20%
111
34%
161
23%
126
30%
Geography
Melrose CDP
Myrtle Creek City
Reedsport City
Riddle City
Roseburg City
Roseburg North CDP
Tri-City CDP
Winchester Bay CDP
Winston City
Yoncalla City
Jackson County
Butte Falls Town
Foots Creek CDP
Gold Hill City
Phoenix City
Shady Cove City
Talent City
Trail CDP
White City CDP
Wimer CDP
Josephine County
Cave Function City
Fruitdale CDP
Grants Pass City
Kerby CDP
O’Brien CDP
Selma CDP
Takilma CDP
Williams CDP
Klamath County
Bonanza Town
Chiloquin City
Klamath Falls City
Malin City
Merrill City
Lane County
Cottage Grove City
Eugene City
Florence City
Type
CDP
City
City
City
City
CDP
CDP
CDP
City
City
County
Town
CDP
City
City
City
City
CDP
CDP
CDP
County
City
CDP
City
CDP
CDP
CDP
CDP
CDP
County
Town
City
City
City
City
County
City
City
City
Total
Population
743
3,446
4,165
921
21,542
6,493
3,866
243
5,352
1,145
203,613
516
861
1,087
4,550
2,893
6,086
203
7,392
708
82,636
1,817
900
34,454
397
143
579
175
1,195
66,350
418
766
20,943
712
805
351,794
9,671
156,222
8,412
Poverty Population
(Shaded Cells are ≥ 25% of
State Percentage)
Number
Percent
62
8%
805
23%
903
22%
209
23%
3,892
18%
1,462
23%
829
21%
19
8%
1,584
30%
310
27%
33,346
16%
129
25%
105
12%
208
19%
765
17%
502
17%
1,156
19%
26
13%
1,584
21%
149
21%
16,301
20%
613
34%
229
25%
6,962
20%
219
55%
38
27%
300
52%
11
6%
372
31%
12,143
18%
90
22%
259
34%
5,131
24%
205
29%
116
14%
64,705
18%
1,833
19%
34,671
22%
995
12%
Total
Households
Median
Household
Income
323
1,388
1,864
409
9,454
2,700
1,317
104
1,809
486
83,370
179
392
470
2,126
1,348
2,797
124
2,338
313
34,373
740
348
14,545
189
106
214
99
492
27,747
149
281
9,054
207
294
145,474
3,876
65,907
4,438
$50,938
$37,650
$28,293
$39,034
$39,621
$30,951
$43,220
$55,652
$31,627
$32,813
$43,664
$39,267
$37,917
$37,375
$31,267
$35,695
$32,961
$28,125
$42,163
$18,375
$36,699
$22,016
$39,231
$32,991
$18,250
$25,987
$23,438
$13,264
$37,264
$41,066
$35,179
$34,141
$31,971
$33,594
$37,500
$42,628
$35,158
$41,525
$35,000
Low-Income Households
(Shaded Cells are ≥ 25%
of State Percentage)
Number
Percent
98
30%
557
40%
805
43%
140
34%
3,101
33%
948
35%
302
23%
46
44%
662
37%
189
39%
23,093
28%
50
28%
153
39%
146
31%
746
35%
506
38%
1,108
40%
44
36%
592
25%
173
55%
11,446
33%
433
59%
120
35%
5,353
37%
145
77%
38
36%
117
55%
74
75%
143
29%
8,740
32%
51
34%
90
32%
3,685
41%
86
42%
99
34%
42,478
29%
1,430
37%
20,958
32%
1,611
36%
1585 | P a g e
Geography
Junction City
Oakridge City
Springfield City
Lincoln County
Lincoln City
Newport City
Siletz City
Waldport City
Linn County
Cascadia CDP
Crabtree CDP
Halsey City
Lacomb CDP
Mill City (1)
Shedd CDP
Sweet Home City
Waterloo Town
West Scio CDP
Marion County
Brooks CDP
Four Corners CDP
Gates City
Gervais City
Hayesville CDP
Labish Village CDP
Mehama CDP
Woodburn City
Multnomah County
Wood Village City
Polk County
Falls City
Independence City
Monmouth City
Tillamook County
Bayside Gardens CDP
Beaver CDP
Cape Meares CDP
Cloverdale CDP
Garibaldi City
1586 | P a g e
Type
City
City
City
County
City
City
City
City
County
CDP
CDP
City
CDP
City
CDP
City
Town
CDP
County
CDP
CDP
City
City
CDP
CDP
CDP
City
County
City
County
City
City
City
County
CDP
CDP
CDP
CDP
City
Total
Population
5,445
3,211
59,347
45,992
7,926
9,989
1,400
1,818
116,871
20
308
1,015
345
1,625
607
8,938
320
163
315,391
665
16,472
675
2,475
18,224
195
238
23,879
737,110
3,870
75,448
1,089
8,535
9,549
25,254
804
189
74
337
736
Poverty Population
(Shaded Cells are ≥ 25% of
State Percentage)
Number
Percent
1,239
23%
667
21%
12,143
20%
7,262
16%
1,616
20%
1,815
18%
310
22%
263
14%
19,237
16%
15
75%
33
11%
206
20%
40
12%
393
24%
236
39%
1,930
22%
78
24%
52
32%
55,223
18%
160
24%
3,754
23%
161
24%
685
28%
4,671
26%
44
23%
56
24%
5,362
22%
123,434
17%
1,211
31%
10,788
14%
251
23%
2,244
26%
2,167
23%
4,197
17%
182
23%
6
3%
21
28%
124
37%
150
20%
Total
Households
Median
Household
Income
2,049
1,514
23,972
21,039
3,932
4,455
495
924
44,566
17
151
295
129
569
183
3,645
88
111
113,227
175
5,467
271
629
6,437
70
86
7,517
303,654
1,281
27,973
383
2,848
3,358
10,843
365
84
45
106
353
$35,067
$41,284
$38,315
$41,996
$29,686
$47,270
$37,188
$35,889
$47,129
$6,417
$72,526
$50,804
$51,193
$40,313
$61,599
$36,205
$48,750
$16,845
$46,654
$11,161
$45,372
$39,750
$45,063
$39,587
$34,015
$56,406
$41,818
$51,582
$42,917
$52,365
$36,083
$40,719
$29,697
$41,869
$37,566
$45,750
$85,417
$41,429
$38,750
Low-Income Households
(Shaded Cells are ≥ 25%
of State Percentage)
Number
Percent
770
38%
527
35%
7,455
31%
6,480
31%
1,687
43%
1,417
32%
159
32%
398
43%
11,364
26%
15
88%
50
33%
47
16%
43
33%
177
31%
17
9%
1,185
33%
24
27%
61
55%
27,514
24%
95
54%
1,438
26%
91
34%
140
22%
1,944
30%
15
21%
22
26%
2,195
29%
74,699
25%
369
29%
6,658
24%
148
39%
946
33%
1,461
44%
3,123
29%
110
30%
39
46%
21
47%
11
10%
118
33%
Geography
Type
Total
Population
Poverty Population
(Shaded Cells are ≥ 25% of
State Percentage)
Number
Percent
79
20%
41
36%
1
1%
250
23%
154
14%
1,473
30%
25
9%
57,466
11%
293
9%
13,068
13%
302
18%
17
15%
257
18%
319
19%
Total
Households
Median
Household
Income
Low-Income Households
(Shaded Cells are ≥ 25%
of State Percentage)
Number
Percent
107
70%
41
52%
30
49%
106
26%
190
34%
848
40%
44
32%
31,825
16%
661
34%
7,089
21%
174
31%
84
87%
225
39%
201
32%
Idaville CDP
CDP
395
153
$23,444
Neahkahnie CDP
CDP
115
79
$9,659
Neskowin CDP
CDP
91
61
$32,566
Pacific City CDP
CDP
1,078
408
$31,348
Rockaway Beach City
City
1,082
555
$36,318
Tillamook City
City
4,934
2,100
$31,832
Wheeler City
City
280
139
$30,893
Washington County
County
531,818
200,160
$64,375
King City
City
3,138
1,967
$36,446
Yamhill County
County
99,119
33,920
$53,950
Amity City
City
1,636
557
$48,750
Fort Hill CDP (1)
CDP
110
97
$21,514
Grand Ronde CDP (1)
CDP
1,451
573
$35,240
Willamina City (1)
City
1,685
633
$34,844
Tribes
Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw
Reservation and Off-Reservation Trust
Tribe
24
6
25%
15
$15,938
10
67%
Land, OR
Coquille Reservation and Off-Reservation
Tribe
297
67
23%
102
$28,750
49
48%
Trust Land, OR (2)
Cow Creek Reservation, OR (2)
Tribe
21
0%
9
$22,250
5
56%
Grand Ronde Community and OffTribe
473
130
27%
185
$24,861
95
51%
Reservation Trust Land, OR
Klamath Reservation, OR
Tribe
17
9
53%
14
$6,944
12
86%
Warm Springs Reservation and OffTribe
3,960
1,069
27%
1037
$47,526
209
20%
Reservation Trust Land, OR
Notes:
(1) Where a city or Census Designated Place (CDP) spans more than one county, the BLM assigned it to the county with largest share of population.
(2) Shows 2009 American Community Survey 5-Year data since 2012 data not available.
Sources:
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04, DP05, S1901 and S1701; American FactFinder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04, DP05, S1901 and S1701; American FactFinder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04, DP05, S1901 and S1701; American FactFinder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, Profile of Selected Economic Characteristics: 2000 Census 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3), Table DP-3; American FactFinder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (Sept 2014).
1587 | P a g e
References
Adams, D. M., and R. W. Haynes. 1980. The 1980 softwood timber assessment market model: structure, projections, and policy
simulations. Forest Science 26(3): a0001–z0001.
Adams, D. M., and R. W. Haynes. 2007. Resource and market projections for forest policy development: twenty-five years of
experience with the USRPA Timber Assessment. Vol. 14. Springer Science & Business Media. 589 pp.
Amoako-Tuffour, J., and R. Martínez-Espiñeira. 2012. Leisure and the net opportunity cost of travel time in recreation demand
analysis: an application to Gros Morne National Park. Journal of Applied Economics, 15(1), 25–49.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1514-0326(12)60002-6.
Bureau of Labor Statistics .2015. American Time Use Survey. http://www.bls.gov/tus/.
George, P. S., and G. A. King. 1971. Consumer demand for food commodities in the United States with projections for 1980.
Giannini Foundation Monograph Number 26. http://giannini.ucop.edu/Monographs/26_George_King.pdf.
Haynes, R. W. 2008. Emergent lessons from a century of experience with Pacific Northwest timber markets. General Technical
Report PNW-GTR-747. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR. 45 pp.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Richard_Haynes7/publication/237416217_Emergent_Lessons_From_a_Century_of_Ex
perience_With_Pacific_Northwest_Timber_Markets/links/561becd808ae044edbb38b12.pdf.
Hotelling, H. 1947. Letter to National Park Service in An Economic Study of the Monetary Evaluation of Recreation in the
Nationa1 Parks (U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service and Recreational Planning Division, 1949).
Krumenauer, G., and B. Turner. 2014. Employment projections by industry and occupations 2012–2022, Oregon and regional
summary. Oregon Employment Department, April 2014.
https://www.qualityinfo.org/documents/10182/92203/Oregon+Employment+Projections+2012-2022?version=1.0 (accessed
November 21, 2014).
McConnell, K. E., and I. Strand. 1981. Measuring the cost of time in recreation demand analysis: an application to sport fishing.
American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 63(1), 153–156. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1239822.
MIG, Inc. 2013. IMPLAN version 3 software and Oregon state package data set. Huntersville, NC.
http://implan.com/.OregonForestResourcesInstitute, 2012.
Oregon Forest Resources Institute (OFRI). 2012. The 2012 Forest Report: An economic assessment of Oregon’s forest and wood
products manufacturing sector. Portland, OR. Data support provided by Dr. Dan Green of Economic Analysis Systems.
Moscow, ID.
Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD). 2011. Oregon Statewide Outdoor Recreation Resource/Facility Bulletin Final
Report. A component of the 2013–2017 Oregon Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan.
Siikamäki, J. 2011. Contributions of the U.S. State park system to nature recreation. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 108(34), 14031–14036. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/34/14031.full.pdf.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2013. American time use survey—Multi-year activity lexicon 2003–2013. 11 pp.
http://www.bls.gov/tus/lexiconnoex0313.pdf.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Census2000, Summary File 1, Table DP05; generated by Joan Huston; using American FactFinder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (May 2014).
---. 2000. American Community Survey, Profile of Selected Economic Characteristics: 2000 Census 2000 Summary File 3 (SF3),
Table DP-3; American FactFinder. http://factfinder2.census.gov; (Sept 2014).
---. 2009. American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 5-YearEstimates,Tables DP03,DP04,
DP05,S1901and S1701; generated by Joan Huston; using American FactFinder. http://factfinder2.census.gov; (May2014).
---. 2009. American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04, DP05, S1901 and S1701; American FactFinder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
---. 2010. 2010 Census: State Population Profile Maps. http://www.census.gov/2010census/.
---. 2010. American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04, DP05, S1901 and S1701; American FactFinder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
---. 2010. American Community Survey, 2010 Census Restricting Data, Table DP05; American FactFinder.
http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
---. 2011. American Community Survey, 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04, DP05,
S1901and S1701;American FactFinder. http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
---. 2012. American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04, DP05,
S1901 and S1701; generated by Joan Huston; using American FactFinder. http://factfinder2.census.gov; (May2014).
---. 2012. American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables DP03, DP04, DP05,
S1901 and S1701; American FactFinder. http://factfinder2.census.gov; (July 2014).
---. 2013. On The Map Application. Longitudinal-Employer Household Dynamics Program. http://onthemap.ces.census.gov/;
generated by Clive Graham July 3, 2014.
U.S. Geological Service. 2015. Protected Areas Data Portal. http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/.
Zhou, X. 2013. Production, prices, employment, and trade in Northwest forest industries, all quarters 2012. Resource Bulletin
PNW-RB-265. USDA FS, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 163 pp.
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_rb265.pdf.
1588 | P a g e